I'm still in shock, but I'm thrilled to announce that my first solo law review article, "The Specter of Indian Removal: The Persistence of State Supremacy Tropes in Federal Indian Law," will be published in @ColumLRev!!!
Tanner Allread
1,068 posts
Tanner Allread
@tannerallread
Milanovich Fellow @UCLA_Law | Ph.D. Candidate @StanfordHistory, J.D. @StanfordLaw | Indian Law Scholar & Legal Historian | Okie | Chahta | Queer | he/him/his
- Just posted on SSRN: Mine and Greg Ablavsky’s article, “We the (Native) People?: How Indigenous Peoples Debated the U.S. Constitution,” which is forthcoming in the @ColumLRev Read it here: ssrn.com/abstract=43531…
- Absolutely floored to learn that my @ColumLRev article “The Specter of Indian Removal” won this year’s Cromwell Foundation Legal History Article of the Year Prize. I never imagined this would happen at this very early stage of my career.Cromwell Article of the Year Prize to Allread and Zhang and Morley dlvr.it/TFNm9s
- The Brackeen majority opinion is very important. But I also think we should pay special attention to Justice Gorsuch's concurrence. A 🧵 on how Gorsuch brings clarity to Indian law while setting up significant issues to be resolved: (1/14)
- It’s finally here!! My first solo-authored article, “The Specter of Indian Removal: The Persistence of State Supremacy Arguments in Federal Indian Law,” is out in @ColumLRev! A short thread on what I do in this article 🧵
- Honored to have won this year’s @StanfordLawHist Legal History Paper Prize for my paper on the first Choctaw Constitution (and the first-ever written tribal constitution)!Stanford Law School Legal History Paper Prize - mailchi.mp/2d96ade47ee0/g…
- My and Greg Ablavsky’s “We the (Native) People?: How Indigenous Peoples Debated the U.S. Constitution” is officially out in @ColumLRev!!! Read the published version here: columbialawreview.org/content/we-the…
- Ecstatic to finally have my article, “The Specter of Indian Removal,” in print! And if you haven’t read it yet, you can access it here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
- Since it's website official now, I'm excited to announce that I'm a new @UCLA_Law Richard M. Milanovich Fellow in Law! For the next 2 years, I will be working with @NNLPC_UCLALaw while continuing to write Native law and legal history scholarship.
- Replying to @tannerallreadFirst, Gorsuch rightly lays out the awful history involving the taking of Indian children and how ICWA was enacted as a response to this history. You cannot truly understand ICWA and its validity without this historical context. (2/14)
- Replying to @tannerallreadIn his concurrence, Gorsuch proves that he is the Justice who is the most serious on engaging with Indian law and Native history. Now, we just have to see where his call for aligning Indian law with the original understanding of the Constitution will take us. (14/14)
- I’m so honored to be an inaugural recipient of the @SHEARites DEI Fellowship! And I’m thankful for the recognition that my work on the intersection of tribal governance and Indian Removal will impact the wider history of the early American republic.SHEAR is pleased to announce the inaugural class of recipients for its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Fellowships. Congratulations to Tanner Allread, Alexander Chaparro-Silva, Alison McCann, and Dr. Désha Osborne! thepanorama.shear.org/2022/03/28/she…
- Replying to @tannerallreadSecond Gorsuch walks through the original understandings of Indian law. Relying on the Constitution, early practices, and Worcester v. Georgia, he affirms that tribes have always been recognized as independent sovereigns and thus states have no authority in Indian affairs. (3/14)
- For those interested in how Justice Thomas's dissent in Brackeen gets the history of Indian affairs totally wrong (and tries to unsuccessfully take down Greg's amazing scholarship), see Greg Ablavsky's new @Slate article:
