Even in Death Geronimo Can't Rest in Peace

A federal judge in Washington, DC dismissed a case by the descendants of Apache warrior Geronimo against the Skull and Bones society of Yale in a bid to reclaim his stolen remains. Apparently a Bonesman  (rumored to have been the patriarch of the Bush political dynasty) stole the remains from Oklahoma's Fort Still during a ceremony in 1918.

The dismissal hinged on Judge Roberts' holding that the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act only applies to grave robberies that took place after its enactment in 1990.

The judge was likely technically correct as a read of the statute reveals no retroactivity clause, something that would typically be required to reach back to an act committed in 1918. Additionally, the statute specifically states that it applies to 'The ownership or control of Native American cultural items which are excavated or discovered on Federal or tribal lands after the date of enactment of this Act' (emphasis added).

So, it seems that Native objects and remains in the hands of individuals before the law was passed were meant to remain there. This was undoubtedly intentional, otherwise the law's author would not have included the 'after the date of enactment' bit. Additionally, there were provisions for museums and government entities to repatriate existing collections, lending further contextual proof that not including such provisions for individuals was intentional and not merely an oversight.

However, whatever the intent of the law's author was, there is something about this case that rubs the conscience the wrong way; almost that the letter of the law wasn't clever enough to keep up with its spirit, almost a sense that the good guys lost. Perhaps this will be one of those situations where what would seem to be a morally wrong result arrived at by a judge's otherwise correct reading of a statute will lead to a reevaluation of the law. If not, Geronimo's descendants won't be the only losers.