The regulation of domestic drone use has been the subject of much media attention. In addition to how much domestic drones should be regulated, scholars and policymakers are debating a more complex question, which is who should regulate drones. In this Essay, Margot Kaminski, Executive Director of the Yale Information Society Project, suggests that civilian drone use should be regulated by states rather than the federal government. She argues that because civilian drone use implicates privacy issues that states have previously regulated through statutes and common-law torts, and because there is a tension between privacy and First Amendment concerns that states will navigate better than the federal government, state law should - at least for now - be the primary means of governing civilian drone overflights.
Current CLR member Keagan D. Buchanan previews the Supreme Court's upcoming decision in Maryland v. King, which will decide whether Maryland's expansion of its DNA collection and analysis procedures to felony arrestees is constitutional.
This note is one of seven written by California Law Review members for Circuit's first annual Case Note Review.
This piece expands upon the author's comments at the Henderson Center's Fall 2012 Symposium, "Heeding Frickey's Call: Doing Justice in Indian Country."
Connecticut School of Law Professor Bethany R. Berger looks at the relationship between descent-based tribal citizenship requirements and race or racism. She argues that tribal citizenship laws that require Indian or tribal descent are generally neither the product nor the source of racism in federal Indian law and policy, and instead are moral, legal, and consistent with federal and international norms.
NEWS & EVENTS
Founded in 1912, CLR publishes six times per year on a variety of engaging topics in legal scholarship.
The law review is edited and published entirely by students at Berkeley Law.