Sir: Your learned correspondent John P. Bryson (April 2020), commenting on the High Court decision in Love and Thoms, presents a conundrum. Whilst accepting the correctness of the minority judgments, Mr Bryson enjoins us to accept that the majority judgments “contain every idea and enthusiasm for the firm grounding and splendour of native title” notwithstanding his conclusion that “there is something of a gap between immigration law and the removal of criminals”. The consequence of the majority’s judgment is a new category of “non-alien”, founded upon Aboriginality and Aboriginal connections (at least for Mr Thoms). That few persons may qualify…