Today, scholars of federal Indian law regard the propriety of different legal instruments establishing reservations to be a vestigial question. We are used to a federal Indian law where we may safely ...

There is something irritatingly wrong with Indian law practice at the Supreme Court. Oral argument at the Supreme Court is a bitterly unpleasant affai ...

Montana v. US is a case about tribal civil jurisdiction. Yet it has had a second life in a surprising context: federal statutes of general applicability that do not mention tribes. This Comment ...

McBratney and Draper judicially pierced the Tribal-federal enclave and categorically injected state authority onto Tribal lands. States retain exclusive jurisdiction over non-Indians who victimize non ...

In this response, I suggest that while Khan and her co-authors are on the right track, even their ambitious vision may not be ambitious enough. The problem with the notice and consent paradigm isn’t ...

Aditya Bamzai and Peter Shane trace the enduring debate of the President’s removal power. Together they provide a comprehensive yet succinct history ...

Sonia Mittal–a senior January 6 prosecutor–details the firings, demotions, and investigations of DOJ prosecutors. Mittal argues these executive ac ...

Within the context of government grants to private entities conditioned on restrictions of speech, scholars and courts have been grasping for something like an extension of Dole’s independent ...

Drawing on global political histories, Diego Zambrano explores why many democracies abroad rally around “the rule of law,” while Americans reach i ...

In Trump’s second term, courts face mounting pressure to issue broad, sweeping remedies in response to clear executive overreach. While Samuel Bray and James Pfander often disagree about judicial ...

EO 14230 is not merely bureaucratic overreach; it is, as Judge Howell suggested during the initial hearing, a directive that “puts the cart before the horse” and mirrors “what happened during the Red ...