The CalNAGPRA Repatriation Nightmare: A Threat to California Native Artists and Artisans

On Friday, May 9th 2025, California State University, Los Angeles (Cal State LA) librarians, chairs, associate deans and deans received an email from Academic Affairs with the subject heading: “Response Required: Campus Survey of Items of Cultural Significance for Native California Tribal Communities.”

The email, signed by Gregorio Pacheco, the CalNAGPRA/NAGPRA Repatriation Coordinator, states:

"Pursuant to the legislation described below, we would like to ask you as a member of our Cal State LA campus community, to complete the attached form indicating what, if any, objects of Native Californian origin your department or administrative unit have in your physical possession. PLEASE NOTE: these objects are not limited to items recovered by archaeological excavation, and can include objects purchased or gifted to you or the campus at any point in time."

The legislation Pacheco is referring to is AB 978 (Steinberg), commonly referred to as CalNAGPRA (i.e., the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act); AB 2836 (Gloria), (which requires universities to form committees to implement repatriation laws); and AB 275 (Ramos), which I have previously described as “NAGPRA on steroids” for requiring deference to indigenous knowledge, regardless of its validity. All these legislative acts relate to archaeological and historic materials, in an attempt to bring items from burial sites back to (and, thus, repatriate) related lineal descendants and culturally-affiliated tribe.

What Does Process Completion Look Like?

Is it a demand to give back any items of Native Californian origin, regardless of when, where, and how they were obtained? Is the burden of proof of personal ownership on the faculty and administrators?

• The email demands that faculty and administrators disclose if there are items of Native Californian origin in their physical possession.
• The form asks questions about the origin of the items, such as when they were obtained and where they are physically located.
• Ownership information is being demanded: “Is the University of the legal OWNER of the objects?”

This overreach, demanding everything of Native Californian origin, is a violation of the US Constitution’s 4th Amendment (which protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, requiring warrants to be issued based on probable cause). But, these actions will harm Californian native artists and artisans most – under these circumstances, who would be willing to buy, or gift works from California Native artists, from jewelry to ceramics to paintings? Their magnificent creations will be shunned, and all of us will be the poorer for it.

The Consequences of CalNAGPRA Repatriation

One scenario is that a gift, freely-given by a Californian native, may have to be catalogued, prior to repatriation; the person who gave the gift will then take it back – and there’s a phrase for that!

"Take It Back" is just one of many phrases used to describe the consequences of CalNAGPRA repatriation, which may lead to the loss of cultural heritage and community.

The Bill Direct Link

For more information on this topic, please refer to Cal State LA Repatriation Coordinator Demanding Everything of Native Californian Origin: More Woke Overreach.

Conclusion

This CalNAGPRA repatriation nightmare is a threat to California native artists and artisans. The overreach of the CalNAGPRA repatriation process demands everything of Native Californian origin, disregarding the facts and personal ownership.