CategoryDiscourse

For the last forty years the U.S. Supreme Court has been engaged in a measured attack on the sovereignty of Indian tribes when it comes to tribal court jurisdiction over people who are not members of the tribe asserting that jurisdiction. This Article proposes to legislatively reconfirm the civil jurisdiction of tribal courts over such nonmembers.

Discussions of automation in the workplace typically omit policing. This is a mistake. The increasing combination of artificial intelligence and robotics will provide us with social benefits, but it will also create new problems as automation replaces human labor. Mass unemployment may be one consequence. Another is deskilling, the loss of the skills and knowledge needed to perform a job when...

Given that federal law attaches drastic consequences to crimes that states, localities, tribes, and territories have already punished, the categorical approach is good federalist policy. Until and unless these added consequences are abolished, courts should continue to apply the approach, and the Court’s fealty to categorical analysis is cause for celebration.

Each year, the UCLA School of Law presents the William Rutter Award for Excellence in Teaching to an outstanding law professor. On April 22, 2019, this honor was given to Professor Beth Colgan. UCLA Law Review Discourse is proud to continue its tradition of publishing a modified version of the ceremony speech delivered by the award recipient.

The critical literature on copyright law’s fair use rule is enormous, with much of the recent spilling of ink bemoaning the overuse of transformativeness as a decisive factor in the case law. Many courts now consider whether a secondary user has added value to a work by including new insights or new aesthetics to be critical in resolving fair use disputes, even if the amount taken from the...

This article evaluates such an idea insofar as it could potentially constitute a bill of attainder, be applied retroactively, or violate a president’s constitutional rights. Ultimately, the article concludes that the bill would pass judicial scrutiny, whether it could be used in the way Nadler envisioned—namely going after the Oval Office’s current occupant—is a matter of timing, not...