Legitimacy in Spite of the Law: the Ethics of Property Appropriation in Distressed Detroit

• In Event: 241 - Regular Session. Law and Society

Abstract

Within the distressed urban conditions of Detroit, the illegal use of private property is prevalent. What I call “resistant property practices” take many forms: squatters take up residence in abandoned houses, residents garden on lots they don’t own, usable materials are salvaged from decaying buildings, and blighted properties are demolished or burnt down, all without the permission of the legal property owner. Why do residents in Detroit accept or even advocate for these illegal practices that explicitly violate private property laws – a key pillar of the US legal system? Using data from nearly seventy interviews with Detroiters, I find that within the distressed urban conditions of the city, the law is not salient for assessing the legitimacy of private property use. Instead, other non-legal conditions of life in Detroit are more influential for how residents make sense of resistant property practices. Rather than invoking the law, residents and resisters utilize an ethos of care to assess the legitimacy of de jure illegal property use and instantiate order with regard to these practices. Residents’ use of and adherence to the ethos of care is not indicative of a wholesale rejection of the law or private property ownership. Rather, this case demonstrates that the legal consciousness of residents and resisters is rooted in an alternative conception of order and justice that operates “in spite of the law”, taking into account ethical concerns for the wider community in the context of its near total collapse.

Author

• Claire W. Herbert, University of Michigan