In May the Full Court of the Federal Court handed down its decision in Yunupingu v Commonwealth.1 The Commonwealth has since announced its intention to appeal the decision to the High Court, citing the ‘broader implications’ of the Full Federal Court decision.2 Most attention has been focused on the constitutional implications of the exercise of the territories power under the Australian Constitution.3 The case is, however, a land rights case concerning the lands the subject of the 1971 decision in Milirrpum v Nabalco.4 That it has constitutional dimensions is unsurprising, on our assessment, given the longstanding intersection of constitutional matters, property, and the recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as what we describe as rights-bearing subjects of law.5 These three legal themes often appear together in arguments by the State seeking to deny Indigenous claims to land.