
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


The Supreme Court upheld various provisions of the controversial Indian Child Welfare Act last week. The facts of Haaland v. Brackeen, and some provisions of the Act, raise dramatic questions about questions of best interests of children, of the nature of tribal entities, and of who speaks for whom. The opinion itself largely sidesteps many of these questions and instead dives into areas which Professor Amar has long offered his expertise - going back nearly 20 years or more. No wonder, then, that he is cited twice in this case, and now our listeners have the chance to learn from the acknowledged expert on these matters.
By Akhil Reed Amar4.5
376376 ratings
The Supreme Court upheld various provisions of the controversial Indian Child Welfare Act last week. The facts of Haaland v. Brackeen, and some provisions of the Act, raise dramatic questions about questions of best interests of children, of the nature of tribal entities, and of who speaks for whom. The opinion itself largely sidesteps many of these questions and instead dives into areas which Professor Amar has long offered his expertise - going back nearly 20 years or more. No wonder, then, that he is cited twice in this case, and now our listeners have the chance to learn from the acknowledged expert on these matters.

3,541 Listeners

2,271 Listeners

1,104 Listeners

2,026 Listeners

6,294 Listeners

6,611 Listeners

7,230 Listeners

5,866 Listeners

622 Listeners

3,948 Listeners

3,355 Listeners

822 Listeners

15,950 Listeners

749 Listeners

8,439 Listeners