Domination Chronicles: Say Something, See Something

This episode turns to Halverson v. Burgum, a 2025 Ninth Circuit decision dismissing Jack Halverson’s case against the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The court’s reasoning invokes the United States’ sovereign immunity and cites Johnson v. McIntosh, showing how a case from 1823 remains active inside contemporary legal decisions affecting Native people.

Newcomb and d’Errico use the case to show why close reading matters. Modern opinions may appear technical or procedural, but their authority often rests on older claims of domination that courts continue to treat as settled law. The episode asks listeners to see what is present in plain sight: Christian discovery and federal power do not merely belong to history. They reappear whenever courts transform Native peoples’ attempts to seek remedy into occasions for reaffirming U.S. control. The discussion is an invitation to notice how domination speaks through ordinary legal language.

Direct link