Wana the Bear v. Community Construction

Last updated

Wana the Bear v. Community Construction (1982) was a court case decision by the California Court of Appeals that upheld the non-protected status of Native American burial grounds. The decision effectively allowed for the continued mass desecration of Native American burial sites, including looting, since they were not legally protected as cemeteries. The case is often referred to as a display of ethnocentrism in legal decisions. [1] [2]

Contents

In 1990, U.S. Congress passed the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, which effectively ended this double standard and centuries of grave desecration, largely as a result of Native American grassroots activism. [1]

Background

In 1979, the case was initiated after a housing development in Stockton, California, began bulldozing a Miwok burial ground, unearthing the ancestral remains of two hundred people. [1] The site had at once contained the remains of over 600 people. [3] As the number of people unearthed grew, Wana the Bear, a descendant of the people attempted to stop the mass grave desecration and removal by citing California's 1854 statute on cemeteries, which protected places where "six or more human bodies buried in one place constitute a cemetery." [1]

The issue of the case was whether this 1854 law applied to the burial grounds of Native Americans. [1]

Decision

In 1982, the California Court of Appeals sided with the commercial developers arguing that because the site had ceased being used for a period of five years or more that it was no longer considered a cemetery. [1]

Criticism

The decision has been heavily criticized by Indigenous people, who note that the court failed to take into account that the cessation in using burial grounds for a period of five years or more was involuntary, since Indigenous peoples of California throughout the state were driven away from their homelands by settlers during the gold rush and California Genocide. [1]

The decision has been referred to as a double standard, since "non-Indian graves have never been treated in such a manner anywhere in the United States." [1] The decision was criticized as heavily ethnocentric and is often discussed in relation to other similar decisions against native people at the time, including State v. Glass which upheld that Indigenous remains were not protected under a statue against grave robbing in Ohio and Carter v. City of Zanesville which upheld that a cemetery was considered abandoned if use ceased. [2]

Implications

The decision allowed hundreds of thousands of Native American human bodies to be unearthed and removed from sites, often for residential and commercial development. [1]

Later developments

In 1990, U.S. Congress passed the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, which, in theory, effectively ended this double standard that Wana the Bear v. Community Construction upheld, although the burden of proof to demonstrate connection still falls on native people, which is often difficult when sites have already been desecrated and artifacts have been removed or stolen. [3]

In California, Assembly Bill 275: Cultural Preservation (AB 275) was passed in 2020 that attempted to extend protections to some non-federally recognized tribes. [4] This development was received controversially by some tribes, some of whom argued that it perpetuated genocide. [5]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cemetery</span> Place of burial

A cemetery, burial ground, gravesite or graveyard is a place where the remains of dead people are buried or otherwise interred. The word cemetery implies that the land is specifically designated as a burial ground and originally applied to the Roman catacombs. The term graveyard is often used interchangeably with cemetery, but a graveyard primarily refers to a burial ground within a churchyard.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act</span> 1990 US law protecting Native American remains and artifacts

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), Pub. L. 101-601, 25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq., 104 Stat. 3048, is a United States federal law enacted on November 16, 1990.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Burial</span> Ritual act of placing a dead person into the ground

Burial, also known as interment or inhumation, is a method of final disposition whereby a dead body is placed into the ground, sometimes with objects. This is usually accomplished by excavating a pit or trench, placing the deceased and objects in it, and covering it over. A funeral is a ceremony that accompanies the final disposition. Evidence suggests that some archaic and early modern humans buried their dead. Burial is often seen as indicating respect for the dead. It has been used to prevent the odor of decay, to give family members closure and prevent them from witnessing the decomposition of their loved ones, and in many cultures it has been seen as a necessary step for the deceased to enter the afterlife or to give back to the cycle of life.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Grave robbery</span> Act of uncovering a tomb or crypt to steal artifacts or personal effects

Grave robbery, tomb robbing, or tomb raiding is the act of uncovering a grave, tomb or crypt to steal commodities. It is usually perpetrated to take and profit from valuable artefacts or personal property. A related act is body snatching, a term denoting the contested or unlawful taking of a body, which can be extended to the unlawful taking of organs alone.

<i>United States v. Washington</i> 1974 court case

United States v. Washington, 384 F. Supp. 312, aff'd, 520 F.2d 676, commonly known as the Boldt Decision, was a legal case in 1974 heard in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The case re-affirmed the rights of American Indian tribes in the state of Washington to co-manage and continue to harvest salmon and other fish under the terms of various treaties with the U.S. government. The tribes ceded their land to the United States but reserved the right to fish as they always had. This included their traditional locations off the designated reservations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Indian Religious Freedom Act</span> United States Law protecting Native Americans religious practices

The American Indian Religious Freedom Act, Public Law No. 95–341, 92 Stat. 469, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1996, is a United States federal law, enacted by joint resolution of the Congress in 1978. Prior to the act, many aspects of Native American religions and sacred ceremonies had been prohibited by law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Huron Cemetery</span> United States historic place

The Huron Indian Cemetery in Kansas City, Kansas, also known as Huron Park Cemetery, is now formally known as the Wyandot National Burying Ground. It was established circa 1843, soon after the Wyandot had arrived following removal from Ohio. The tribe settled in the area for years, with many in 1855 accepting allotment of lands in Kansas in severalty. The majority of the Wyandot removed to Oklahoma in 1867, where they maintained tribal institutions and communal property. As a federally recognized tribe, they had legal control over the communal property of Huron Cemetery. For more than 100 years, the property has been a source of controversy between the federally recognized Wyandotte Nation, based in Oklahoma, which wanted to sell it for redevelopment, and the much smaller, unrecognized Wyandot Nation of Kansas, which wanted to preserve the burying ground.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Slack Farm</span>

Slack Farm is an archaeological site of the Caborn-Welborn variant of the Mississippian culture. Slack Farm is located near Uniontown, Kentucky, close to the confluence of the Ohio River and the Wabash Rivers. The site included a Native American mound and an extensive village occupation dating between 1400–1650 CE. Although Slack Farm was long known to be one of the major villages of the Caborn-Welborn people, it became famous when it was very seriously damaged by looters in 1987.

The Association on American Indian Affairs is a nonprofit human rights charity located in Rockville, Maryland. Founded in 1922, it is dedicated to protecting the rights of Native Americans.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Repatriation and reburial of human remains</span> Ethical considerations in museum management regarding repatriation of human remains

The repatriation and reburial of human remains is a current issue in archaeology and museum management on the holding of human remains. Between the descendant-source community and anthropologists, there are a variety of opinions on whether or not the remains should be repatriated. There are numerous case studies across the globe of human remains that have been or still need to be repatriated.

The archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England is the study of the archaeology of England from the 5th century AD to the 11th century, when it was ruled by Germanic tribes known collectively as the Anglo-Saxons.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indigenous peoples of California</span> Native Californians

Indigenous peoples of California, commonly known as Indigenous Californians or Native Californians, are a diverse group of nations and peoples that are indigenous to the geographic area within the current boundaries of California before and after the colonization of Europeans. There are currently 109 federally recognized tribes in the state and over forty self-identified tribes or tribal bands that have applied for federal recognition. California has the second-largest Native American population in the United States.

Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association, 485 U.S. 439 (1988), was a United States Supreme Court landmark case in which the Court ruled on the applicability of the Free Exercise Clause to the practice of religion on Native American sacred lands, specifically in the Chimney Rock area of the Six Rivers National Forest in California. This area, also known as the High Country, was used by the Yurok, Karuk, and Tolowa tribes as a religious site.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Recognition of Native American sacred sites in the United States</span>

The Recognition of Native American sacred sites in the United States could be described as "specific, discrete, narrowly delineated location on Federal land that is identified by an Indian tribe, or Indian individual determined to be an appropriately authoritative representative of an Indian religion, as sacred by virtue of its established religious significance to, or ceremonial use by, an Indian religion". The sacred places are believed to "have their own 'spiritual properties and significance'". Ultimately, Indigenous peoples who practice their religion at a particular site, they hold a special and sacred attachment to that land sacred land.

<i>In the Courts of the Conqueror</i>

In the Courts of the Conqueror: The 10 Worst Indian Law Cases Ever Decided is a 2010 legal non-fiction book by Walter R. Echo-Hawk, a Justice of the Supreme Court of the Pawnee Nation, an adjunct professor of law at the University of Tulsa College of Law, and of counsel with Crowe & Dunlevy.

Donna L. Moody was a scholar, author, teacher, public speaker, Abenaki Repatriation and Site Protection Coordinator, and founder of the Winter Center for Indigenous Traditions.

The Indian burial ground trope is frequently used to explain supernatural events and hauntings in American popular culture. The trope gained popularity in the 1980s, making multiple appearances in horror film and television after its debut in The Amityville Horror (1979). However, in its more recent appearance, the Indian burial ground trope is seen as a cliche and it is commonly used as a satirical element.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tunica treasure</span> Native American artifact trove

The Tunica treasure is a group of artifacts from the Tunica-Biloxi tribe discovered in the 1960s. Their discovery led to a protracted legal battle over their ownership, and the eventual passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Guashna</span> Former Tongva village at Playa Vista, Los Angeles

Guashna was a Tongva village located at Playa Vista, Los Angeles at the mouth of Ballona Creek. The site has also been referred to as Sa'angna, with various sources debating whether Sa'angna, meaning "place of tar," was a regional referent rather than a village name or whether it was a separate nearby village. The initial place name was said to be Sa'an; the village suffix "ngna" was added by Bernice Johnston to her 1962 map of Gabrieleño villages "despite her having found no mention of the term in baptismal records." Sa'angna is also not to be confused with Suangna. The Tongva referred to the Ballona Wetlands as Pwinukipar, meaning "full of water." Another alternate name may Waachnga.

Cal NAGPRA was an act created by the state of California which was signed into law in 2001. The act was created to implement the same repatriation expectations for state-funded institutions, museums, repositories, or collections as those federally supported through NAGPRA. Cal NAGPRA also supports non-federally recognized tribes within California that were exempt from legal rights to repatriation under the federal NAGPRA act.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Echo-Hawk, Walter (2010). In the Courts of the Conqueror : the 10 Worst Indian Law Cases Ever Decided. New York: Fulcrum. ISBN   978-1-55591-788-3. OCLC   646788565.
  2. 1 2 The future of the past : archaeologists, Native Americans, and repatriation. Tamara L. Bray. New York: Garland Pub. 2001. p. 15. ISBN   978-1-136-54352-4. OCLC   817236389.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  3. 1 2 Native American cultural and religious freedoms. John R. Wunder. New York. 1996. pp. 647–49. ISBN   978-1-135-63126-0. OCLC   878405503.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: others (link)
  4. "California may grant repatriation rights to unrecognised Native American tribes". The Art Newspaper - International art news and events. 2020-07-24. Retrieved 2022-12-26.
  5. Pool, Press (23 July 2019). "AB 275 (Ramos) continues to enforce state sponsored genocide against California tribes". ICT. Retrieved 2022-12-26.