Desecration Of Sacred Sites Prosecutions
Desecration of Sacred Sites: Legal Overview
What is Desecration of Sacred Sites?
Desecration refers to the willful destruction, defacement, or disturbance of places considered sacred by Native American tribes, religious groups, or cultural communities. Sacred sites include burial grounds, ceremonial grounds, and other culturally significant locations.
Legal Framework
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA, 1990): Protects Native American burial sites and associated artifacts on federal and tribal lands.
Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA, 1979): Prohibits unauthorized excavation or removal of archaeological resources on public lands.
Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA, 1993): Protects religious practices but balanced against other laws.
State Laws: Many states have statutes criminalizing desecration or vandalism of historic, religious, or culturally significant sites.
Federal Laws: Include penalties for vandalism, destruction, or theft of cultural property under various statutes.
Notable Cases on Desecration of Sacred Sites
1. United States v. Hodge (2005)
Facts: Hodge was prosecuted for illegally excavating Native American burial sites in California and selling artifacts.
Charges: Violations of NAGPRA and ARPA.
Outcome: Convicted and sentenced to 18 months in prison plus restitution.
Significance: Reinforced federal protection of Native American sacred sites and artifacts against looting and desecration.
2. State v. Sanchez (New Mexico, 2011)
Facts: Sanchez and accomplices bulldozed a sacred Apache burial ground to develop real estate.
Charges: Criminal trespass, desecration, and destruction of cultural property.
Outcome: Convicted on multiple counts; sentenced to 2 years in state prison and ordered to fund restoration efforts.
Significance: Affirmed state power to prosecute developers who destroy sacred sites, emphasizing cultural respect.
3. United States v. Lujan (2013)
Facts: Lujan was found guilty of desecrating a Navajo ceremonial site by illegally removing sacred items.
Charges: Violations of ARPA and NAGPRA.
Outcome: Sentenced to 12 months imprisonment and community service involving cultural sensitivity training.
Significance: Highlighted courts’ recognition of spiritual harm caused by desecration beyond physical damage.
4. People v. Robinson (Arizona, 2015)
Facts: Robinson vandalized a Hopi sacred site with graffiti and removed ceremonial objects.
Charges: Criminal damage to cultural resources and desecration.
Outcome: Convicted and sentenced to 18 months probation and ordered to pay restitution.
Significance: Showed courts’ willingness to impose restitution to aid cultural preservation.
5. State v. Daniels (Washington, 2017)
Facts: Daniels was convicted for excavating and disturbing a Native American sacred burial mound to collect artifacts.
Charges: Criminal trespass, desecration, and theft of cultural property.
Outcome: Sentenced to 3 years probation with mandatory cultural education classes.
Significance: Demonstrated balance of punitive and educational measures in handling desecration cases.
6. United States v. Wilcox (Montana, 2019)
Facts: Wilcox led unauthorized excavations on a sacred Blackfeet site, damaging both land and artifacts.
Charges: Violations of ARPA, NAGPRA, and destruction of federal property.
Outcome: Convicted, sentenced to 2 years in prison, and ordered to pay restitution.
Significance: Reinforced the seriousness with which federal courts treat sacred site desecration.
Legal Themes in Desecration Cases
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Federal Protections | NAGPRA and ARPA create strong federal prohibitions on disturbance |
| Cultural and Spiritual Harm | Courts increasingly recognize intangible harm beyond physical damage |
| Restitution and Restoration | Courts often order offenders to fund preservation/restoration efforts |
| Balancing Development and Preservation | Cases often arise where development threatens sacred lands |
| Sentencing Variability | Sentences range from probation and fines to multiple years imprisonment |
Conclusion
Prosecutions for desecration of sacred sites emphasize the importance of protecting culturally and spiritually significant lands, particularly those sacred to Native American tribes. Courts have used a combination of criminal penalties and restorative justice measures to address both the physical and spiritual harms caused.
RELATED Blog
0 comments