Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
U.S. Government · Public domain · source
Name	Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
Enacted	1990
Citations	25 U.S.C. § 3001 et seq.
Introduced by	George H. W. Bush administration
Signed by	George H. W. Bush
Effective	1990
Status	in force

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act was landmark United States federal legislation enacted to address the treatment of ancestral human remains and cultural items related to federally recognized Native American tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, and Native Alaskan communities. The law responded to activism and legal disputes involving museums, universities, the Smithsonian Institution, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and tribal governments, shaping relations among Congress, the National Park Service, and courts such as the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Background and Legislative History

Congressional deliberations followed high-profile events including repatriation campaigns by the American Indian Movement, protests at the Smithsonian Institution by activists associated with the National Museum of the American Indian movement, and litigation such as cases involving the University of California, the Field Museum of Chicago, and the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. Sponsors and advocates included members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, tribal leaders from the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, the Sioux of the Standing Rock Reservation, and organizations like the National Congress of American Indians, while opponents included some curators and administrators from institutions such as the American Anthropological Association and private collectors. Debates over definitions, property law, and Archaeology practices engaged scholars from Harvard University, University of California, Berkeley, Yale University, and University of Texas. The bill navigated legislative processes in the United States House of Representatives and United States Senate before being signed into law by President George H. W. Bush.

Provisions and Definitions

The statute defines key terms and mandates procedures regarding culturally unidentifiable remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony, creating obligations for museums, federal agencies, and tribes such as the Cherokee Nation, Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Pueblo of Zuni, and Yakama Nation. It establishes inventory and summary requirements for institutions including the Smithsonian Institution, state historic preservation offices like those in California, Arizona, and New Mexico, and agencies such as the National Park Service and the Department of the Interior. The law recognizes rights of lineal descendants and federally recognized tribes, influences compliance with statutes like the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, and interacts with treaties such as the Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868) in dispute contexts. Definitions affect holdings at institutions including the American Museum of Natural History, the National Museum of the American Indian, the Peabody Museum, and tribal cultural centers.

Implementation and Compliance

Implementation responsibilities rest with institutions, the National Park Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Department of the Interior, which oversee notices to tribes including the Seminole Tribe of Florida, Tlingit, and Inupiat. Compliance processes involve inventories, summaries, consultations, and notices to lineal descendants and tribes such as the Blackfeet Nation and the Crow Tribe. Funding and grant programs from agencies including the National Endowment for the Humanities and the Institute of Museum and Library Services affect museums like the Field Museum, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and university collections at University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University. Training initiatives and policy guidance have engaged professional societies including the Society for American Archaeology and the American Alliance of Museums.

Repatriation Process and Procedures

Repatriation requires inventories, consultations, claims by federally recognized tribes or lineal descendants, and offers of return coordinated among institutions such as the Smithsonian Institution, Museum of Natural History (Los Angeles County), and the Brooklyn Museum. Procedures address competing claims from groups like the Iroquois Confederacy, the Lumbee Tribe, and the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, and use determination frameworks applied in disputes involving the Hopi Tribe and the Navajo Nation. The statute establishes timelines for notice and documentation, and mechanisms for dispute resolution including mediation and administrative adjudication, with potential appeals to federal courts such as the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Legal Challenges and Court Cases

Litigation over the statute has involved institutions and tribes in cases before the United States Supreme Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and district courts addressing standing, sovereign immunity, and First Amendment claims. Notable disputes implicated entities such as the University of California, the State University of New York, the Peabody Museum, the Field Museum, and tribal plaintiffs including the Havasupai Tribe. Courts have considered interactions with statutes like the Native American Languages Act and constitutional issues raised by litigants including representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union. Decisions in cases such as those adjudicated by the Eighth Circuit and the Tenth Circuit clarified aspects of ownership, fiduciary obligations, and repatriation procedures.

Impact on Indigenous Communities and Cultural Institutions

The law transformed museum practices at the Smithsonian Institution, the National Museum of the American Indian, the American Museum of Natural History, and the Peabody Museum, prompting cataloguing projects, new curatorial policies, and collaborative exhibits with tribes such as the Lakota, Apache, Ojibwe, and Pueblo communities. Repatriation outcomes affected tribal ceremonies, burial practices, and cultural revitalization programs involving the National Endowment for the Arts and tribal cultural preservation offices of the Hopi Tribe, Zuni Pueblo, and Navajo Nation. The statute also influenced academic research at institutions including Columbia University, Stanford University, and University of Michigan, fostering shifts toward community-based participatory research and changes in archaeological field protocols overseen by agencies like the National Park Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Category:United States federal legislation