Restriction to incompatible common law precedent blocked available reparative remedies

Evidence

The court rightfully disparaged Harvard’s mistreatment of Lanier, Renty, and Delia. And yet, by imprudently restricting itself to common law standards arising from fundamentally incompatible precedent, the court inhibited its ability to access the range of existing remedial interventions that would have made possible reparations in the form of granting property relationships or equitable interests to Lanier. — Tamara Lanier, From These Roots, 1338

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s interest in property law as the afterlife of slavery — the law review names the specific remedial paths (property relationships, equitable interests) the court declined to reach. — connects to: A state may not retroactively eliminate all remedies for a right it cannot destroy — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 2978