Search

Table of Contents Introduction I. Assimilative Colonialism and Tribal Political Power A. Manufacturing Assimilative Colonialism B. Fears and Denials of Collective Native Political Power Within States 1. Native citizenship and [...], There are 574 federally recognized domestic dependent tribal nations in the United States. Each tribe is separate from its respective surrounding state(s) and governs itself. And yet, none of them have the power to send representatives to Congress. Our democratic representative structures function as if tribal governments and the reservations they govern do not exist. But tribal citizens do not simply live within a state and are not simply governed by that state like any other state citizen. Rather, it is tribal law and tribal governments--not state law or state governments--that primarily govern and shape the lives of tribal citizens living on reservations. Tribal governments are not complementary or subsidiary to state governments--they are frequent rivals for power and resources. This system, simply put, doesn't make sense. Tribes should have their own representation in the federal government. This Article makes the case for why and examines how this seemingly obvious omission in our democratic structuring came to pass. This Article examines the democratic mismatch between existing governments--which include not only 50 states, but also 574 federally recognized tribes--and the representative democratic structure that is built into the Constitution around the institution of the state. It details the failed attempts of tribal governments to obtain representation, either as states or outside of statehood. This history reveals a story about race, power, colonialism, and institutions. Attempts by white majorities to hold onto political power within states included denying Native peoples' individual rights and denying statehood to largely Native areas until Native people assimilated or white citizens outnumbered them. These dynamics, which this Article dubs "assimilative colonialism," have not only shaped our existing democratic structures but have also had a lasting effect on Native relationships with political power. The nefarious brilliance of assimilative colonialism was to offer American political power to Native peoples--whether citizenship, statehood, or delegates--only and always at the cost of what made them Native. As a result, many Native people justifiably view American political power not as empowering but as dangerous. Assimilative colonialism has thus held back the emergence of Native movements for political reform by making it impossible to even imagine tribal representation in a real sense since it seemed only possible through assimilation. It is long overdue that we step back and examine the legacy of assimilative colonialism in American representative democracy. We ought to think about structural reform and what representative structures could--and maybe should--have been on the table for tribal governments and their citizens since the beginning. We ought to be asking: What would American democratic structures look like if we truly incorporated tribal governments as equal sovereigns within the United States?

CONTENTS CONTENTS ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION I. BACKGROUND II. THE LAWSUIT III. LATER CASES IV. SCHOOL DESEGREGATION TODAY CONCLUSION INTRODUCTION The Detroit school desegregation case, initiated in August 1970 against State of [...], Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark case in U.S. Supreme Court school desegregation jurisprudence. The claims originated in Michigan, but the effects of the outcome are widespread. School reform efforts dropped desegregation as a primary goal following the 1974 decision and the cases that followed. Absent that focus, school desegregation has disappeared from education policy debate. The particulars of the Milliken case and the advocates for meaningful integration at that time deserve reflection and remembrance.

I INTRODUCTION In a 1960 lecture, entitled "Freedom and Politics", Hannah Arendt stated: (1) The famous sovereignty of political bodies has always been an illusion which, moreover, can be maintained [...], In this article, which is an edited version of my inaugural lecture at Te Herenga Waka--Victoria University of Wellington, I argue that the concept of sovereignty is crucial to understanding one of the main questions of constitutional theory: how can constitutions facilitate self-government and, at the same time, function as mechanisms for the limitation of political power? I do so by re-examining four different ways in which I have encountered the concept of sovereignty through my academic work.

Papua New Guinea (PNG) slogged through a year of uncertainty and trials as it faced a triple threat from the combined forces of the COVID-19 pandemic, economic stagnation (in no [...]

In 2020, my book Corporate Power in Australia: Do the 1% Rule? was published, just as the pandemic hit. The study had been six years in the making, during which [...]

Abstract We present a theory on how trust in the central government to remedy grievances combined with a lack of trust in local government to act motivates people to participate [...]

INTRODUCTION The demands that emerged amid the 2020 uprisings against police violence and white supremacy brought into the national consciousness radical ideas for change in how the state should provide [...], Scholars and reformers have in recent years begun to imagine new and different configurations for how the state can design policing institutions. These conversations have increased in volume and urgency in response to the 2020 national uprising against police violence, when radical demands born within social movements have gained steam--demands to defund the police, to institute "people's budgets," and to give communities control over the state provision of security. In recent years, within this time of foment and possibility, social movements have been proposing, creating, and sometimes establishing new governance arrangements that shift power over policing to those who have been most harmed by mass criminalization and mass incarceration. These recent pushes by social movements for power shifting surface a fundamental set of questions about the very purpose of police reform, adding a new way for scholars and reformers to think about the contours and objectives of the state's provision of safety and security--what this Article terms the power lens. This Article examines the movement focus on power shifting in the governance of the police at both the local and national levels. It fleshes out a three-part theoretical account of why the power lens is an important and necessary addition to how scholars and reformers view the regulation of policing. First, shifting power to policed populations is reparative, in the sense that it shifts power downward toward populations who have been denied political power directly as a result of the history of policing policies and practices in their neighborhoods. Second, power shifting is a means of promoting antisubordination, based on the idea that it is wrong for the state to engage in practices that enforce the inferior social status of historically oppressed groups. Third, a power lens on police reform promotes a particular view of contestatory democracy, one in which democratic policing has as one of its objectives the facilitation of countervailing power for those subject to the domination of the state. Taken together, the power lens brings a critical eye to the ways in which the construction of the notion of "expertise" often denies agency to the people who most often interact with police in the streets and on the roads. More broadly, the power lens opens up discussions of reform to first-order questions about how the state should go about providing safety and security in our time, with or without the police as we know it. AUTHOR. Professor, Brooklyn Law School. For helpful feedback, thank you to Amna Akbar, Shima Baradaran Baughman, Rick Bierschbach, Sharon Brett, Bennett Capers, Tony Cheng, Erin Collins, Brenner Fissell, Barry Friedman, Trevor Gardner, Brandon Garrett, Bernard Harcourt, Benjamin Levin, Kate Levine, Kay Levine, Theo Liebmann, Larry Kirsch, Sandy Mayson, Jason Mazzone, Janet Moore, Jamelia Morgan, Alexandra Natapoff, Ngozi Okidegbe, Sunita Patel, Tony O'Rourke, Sabeel Rahman, Alice Ristroph, Anna Roberts, Shirin Sinnar, David Sklansky, Chris Slobogin, Cara Suvall, and Nathan Yaffe, as well as participants at the Brooklyn Law School Faculty Workshop, University of Chicago Public Law Workshop, Columbia Law School Faculty Workshop, Hofstra Law School Faculty Workshop, Illinois Law School Police Reform Discussion Series, Duke Law School Center for Science & Justice, Stanford Law School Faculty Workshop, Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Workshop, Vanderbilt Criminal Justice Roundtable, CrimFest 2019, Junior Criminal Justice Roundtable, Law of the Police Conference, and the Conference on Agency, Race, and Criminal Procedure at Wisconsin Law School. Thank you to the Brooklyn Law School Faculty Fund for financial support, to Annamarie Foster for excellent research assistance, and to Steffi Ostrowski, Derrick Rice, and the editors of the Yale Law Journal for their superb feedback and editing.

With the United States projected to become a majority-minority nation by the year 2043, California is a critical case study on the power of organizing Latino voters as pundits try [...]

INTRODUCTION 87 I SWING VOTER BASICS 91 A. Plotting Voter Preferences 91 B. Defining Swing Voters 93 1. Pivotality 93 2. Ideological Distance 94 II SWING VOTER POWER 97 A. [...], In recent decades, swing voters in courts and legislatures have made many of the United States' most important decisions of law and policy. It would be easy to conclude from the recent history of the Supreme Court and Congress that democracy or majority rule inevitably entails placing many of a society's most important decisions in the hands of swing voters. Far from being inevitable, however, swing voters result from a highly contingent set of circumstances, both ideological and institutional. This Article probes these contingencies, describing and evaluating swing voters and the power they hold. It first explains the conditions under which swing voters will exist and wield power, including an account of why swing voters hold greater power than other pivotal voters. Understanding swing voters requires understanding institutional design and internal procedures: some arrangements increase swing voter prevalence and power, while others have the opposite effect. The ways in which rules construct swing voters give institutional designers and reformers ample tools at their disposal to increase or decrease the prevalence of swing voters and the extent of their power. But nearly any judgment about swing voters and the power they exercise necessarily rests on thorny empirical and normative issues--including the relative importance of moderation and stability in different institutions, the performance of swing voters as compared to other voters, and how swing voter power interacts with principles of majority rule. Swing voters are therefore best understood not as ends unto themselves, but as windows into broader issues in democratic theory and institutional design.

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 1428 II. WELCOME TO THE BELT AND ROAD 1434 A. The Mechanics of the Belt and Road 1435 B. The (Negative) Effects of the Belt [...], Since its birth in 2015, the Belt and Road Initiative has garnered significant attention for its benefits and its detriments. Much of the current scholarship in this area is focused on particular pieces of the Belt and Road Initiative, with few in legal scholarship considering the impact of the relationship between China's growing soft power and its effect on international law and international institutions. Every state has the right to pursue power and influence, but this Note specifically examines how China's methods of obtaining this power and influence--specifically through the Belt and Road Initiative and related actions within United Nations' organs--are detrimental to human rights. This Note offers a novel analysis of resolutions passed in the UN Human Rights Council and the UN Security Council to shed light on emerging soft law foundations that could justify future extreme acts, before examining steps that states should take to address China's actions.

An Interview with Pastor Evan Mawarire Evan Mawarire is a Zimbabwean pastor and activist. In 2016, a video he recorded, entitled 'This Flag,' inspired tens of thousands of Zimbabweans to [...]

Abstract: This paper examines the fictional reception of Queen Elizabeth I in 17th-century drama by connecting it to coeval debates on the legitimacy of female political power. Specifically, it focuses [...]

Germany's increased power capabilities in foreign affairs since reunification have prompted scholars to argue that the country should be viewed as a regional hegemonic power, exercising significant influence not only over smaller countries in Eastern and Southern Europe, but also over the institutions of the European Union. After providing a critical assessment of the literature on hegemony in Europe, this article outlines three main trends in the scholarship on German power in European affairs. First, scholars tend to exaggerate Berlin's power capabilities relative to other major European states such as France, Italy, and the United Kingdom. Research shows that Europe is best understood as a multipolar regional order, not a hegemonic system dominated by one powerful state. Second, German leadership in Europe is contested and often delegitimized. Since 1949, German political elites have not been able to exercise influence in Europe without the support of other European states. This remains true even after the collapse of the Franco-German 'tandem' in the wake of the European debt crisis. Third, scholars fail to adequately address how American power in the North Atlantic impacts regional polarity. Since reunification, the role of the United States in Europe has only increased and American influence over Eastern Europe, in particular, surpasses that of other European powers, including Germany. Keywords: European regional affairs, foreign policy, Germany, hegemony, German Power in Europe after Reunification In the aftermath of World War II, Germany was divided and forcefully occupied by the Allied Powers. Although the formal military occupation of Germany [...]

Introduction Peoples, like individuals, can go through periods of deep change that may cause them to have doubts about themselves, their basic values, their past, and in particular their future [...]

Introduction In 110 B.C.E., Emperor Wu of Han travelled to Mt. Tai, the tallest mountain in his empire, and performed the feng sacrifice, once at its base in front of [...]