Every Neighbor a LitigantrnThe Individual Versus the Communityrnby Stephen B. PresserrnGoethe taught us that true happiness comes from being engagedrnwith others in productive projects, and we havernknown since Plato and Aristotle that man is a social animal, butrnwe would be hard put to reach these conclusions if our onlyrnguide were the current state of American law. Far too often thernAmerican legal system, at least at the federal level, is obsessedrnwith the purported rights of individuals and gives short shrift torncollective enterprise.rnIfntil the New Deal, the U.S. Supreme Court understoodrnthat the bedrock of constitutional law was the system of propertyrnand contract law that the Framers thought their new Constitutionrnwould secure. Property and contract are classic means byrnwhich the legal system binds us together and allows individualsrnto form meaningful relationships, hi the period between ourrnbreak with Great Britain in 1776 and the drafting of the federalrnConstitution in 1787, propert}- and contract were at risk, as irresponsiblernstate legislatures passed moratoriums on the collectionrnof contractual debts and repeatedly issued increasinglyrnworthless paper money as legal tender. By placing matters concerningrncurrency in the new national government and by forbiddingrnthe state legislatures from interfering with contracts, thernFramers believed that the countrv could achieve prosperityrnthrough the creation of a climate in which propert’, contracts,rncommerce, and relationships would thrive. We were to be arnStephen B. Presser is the Raoul Berger Professor of Legal Historyrnat Northwestern University School of Law and the legal affairsrneditor for Chronicles.rngreat commercial republic, and, in spite of everything, so wernstill are.rnThe Framers understood that the keeping of promises andrnthe carrying out of our just obligations to each other were thernmeans to build up virtue in the citizenry and help guarantee thernkind of disinterested public decision-making which is essentialrnto a stable republic. Cooperation and productivity were vital,rnand indi’iduals were valued to the extent that they contributedrnto the commrmity. The Framers were not strangers to the darkrnparts of the human heart and soul, however, and the constitutionalrnscheme was to create a structure whereby selfish specialrninterests in society and government were played off against eachrnother, so that the true national interest—virtiie, stability, prosperity,rncooperative endeavor — coidd be achieved. ThernFramers understood that unchecked democracy leads to anarchyrnand license, so the republican scheme they erected had anti-rndemocratic elements, including an upper house, a Presidentrnnot subject to direct popular election, judicial review, and a Billrnof Rights.rnThe Framers were convinced that a virtuous citizenry wouldrnbe required to preserve the governmental structure, and theyrnwould probably be shocked to see how the edifice thev erectedrnhas been torn down, piece by piece. Arguments masked as promotingrndemocracy or benefiting allegedly disadvantaged individualsrnor groups have imdermined the foundation of Americanrncommunity and put at risk property, contract, andrncommerce.rnThe 16th Amendment, allowing direct taxation on incomernOCTOBER 1999/15rnrnrn