Greg Ablavsky Commentary on Upper Skagit Decision

Gregory Ablavsky has posted “Upper Skagit v. Lundgren: Deceptively Straightforward Case Raises Fundamental Questions about Native Nations, History, and Sovereignty” on Stanford Law School’s blog. Here are excerpts: This decision provoked the ire of Justice Thomas, who, in a lengthy dissent, insisted that the immovable property exception did apply to tribes.  Thomas’s rationale involved a deep dive …

More

Jenn Weddle Guest Post on Upper Skagit Decision

The Upper Skagit Court’s restraint Monday is appreciated in Indian Country.  A “hornbook” law principle is that tribes need not suffer litigation unless and until either the tribe or Congress expressly says so.  Monday’s Upper Skagit opinion affords appropriate time for further advocacy and lower court consideration as to whether that hornbook principle should be displaced by another—the immovable …

More

Gregory Ablavsky on the Original Meaning of “With the Indian Tribes”, Race, and Citizenship

Gregory Ablavsky has published “With the Indian Tribes”: Race, Citizenship, and Original Constitutional Meanings in the Stanford Law Review. Here is the abstract: Under black-letter law declared in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Morton v. Mancari, federal classifications of individuals as “Indian” based on membership in a federally recognized tribe rely on a political, not …

More

Robert Miller on Tribal Constitutions and Their Influence on the American Constitution

Robert Miller has posted “American Indian Constitutions and Their Influence on the United States Constitution” on SSRN. Here is the abstract: This paper analyzes modern-day American Indian constitutionalism. It describes the development of written constitutions by Indian nations and primarily focuses on constitutions developed since 1934 under the auspices of the federal Indian Reorganization Act. …

More

If ‘Disgruntled Employee’ Actions Are ‘Economically Motivated’ Is It Food Fraud and Does It Meet the FDA’s Definition of ‘Economically Motivated Adulteration”? No and No.

Does it matter? Aren’t they all just words? Not if there is a regulatory compliance issue. The US Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) is still determining where and how they will address ‘Economically Motivated Adulteration’ (EMA) – and there are questions beyond just the text from the Federal Register or from FSMA (see previous blog …

More