Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 1619 Project (1)
- Academic freedom (1)
- Backlash (1)
- Book banning (1)
- Christian (1)
-
- Church (1)
- Counter narrative (1)
- Counter-storytelling (1)
- Court (1)
- Critical Race Theory (1)
- Crusades (1)
- Democracy (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Education (1)
- Genocide (1)
- Indian (1)
- Intersectionality (1)
- Kimberlé Crenshaw (1)
- Land (1)
- Law (1)
- M'Intosh (1)
- Mari Matsuda (1)
- Muscogee (1)
- Native American (1)
- Race (1)
- Racial reckoning (1)
- Racism (1)
- Slavery (1)
- Systemic racism (1)
- Trauma (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Our Silence Will Not Protect Us . . . And Neither Will J. Edgar Hoover: Reclaiming Critical Race Theory Under The New Mccarthyism, Christina Hsu Accomando, Kristin J. Anderson
Our Silence Will Not Protect Us . . . And Neither Will J. Edgar Hoover: Reclaiming Critical Race Theory Under The New Mccarthyism, Christina Hsu Accomando, Kristin J. Anderson
Humboldt Journal of Social Relations
The right-wing attack against critical race theory is the latest manufactured panic designed to whip up supporters of a party beholden to Donald Trump. Since late 2020, hundreds of measures have been introduced across the U.S. to ban antiracism education, critical race theory, the 1619 Project, and any understanding of racism as systemic and embedded in U.S. history and law. While an understandable reaction of educators is to declare that they are not teaching critical race theory, our position is to reclaim critical race theory for the powerful lens it offers in understanding the history of the U.S., the protracted …
Johnson V. M'Intosh: Christianity, Genocide, And The Dispossession Of Indigenous Peoples, Cynthia J. Boshell
Johnson V. M'Intosh: Christianity, Genocide, And The Dispossession Of Indigenous Peoples, Cynthia J. Boshell
Cal Poly Humboldt theses and projects
Using hermeneutical methodology, this paper examines some of the legal fictions that form the foundation of Federal Indian Law. The text of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1823 Johnson v. M’Intosh opinion is evaluated through the lens of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide to determine the extent to which the Supreme Court incorporated genocidal principles into United States common law. The genealogy of M’Intosh is examined to identify influences that are not fully apparent on the face of the case. International jurisprudential interpretations of the legal definition of genocide are summarized and used as …