A tenured anthropology professor specialised in osteology (the research of bone constructions and skeletons) has filed a lawsuit in opposition to San José State College (SJSU) in California alleging that she was wrongfully retaliated in opposition to for exercising her proper to freedom of speech, particularly for expressing her opposition to the repatriation of Native American skeletal stays and burial objects.
Elizabeth Weiss, who has been a professor at SJSU for almost 20 years, printed the ebook Repatriation and Erasing the Previous with James W. Springer in September 2020, by which the authors argue that the Native American Graves Safety and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) undermines scientific analysis and “favours faith over science”.
The NAGPRA statute was enacted in 1990 and requires that federally-funded establishments catalogue their holdings of Native American human stays and burial objects to facilitate their repatriation to the suitable culturally-affiliated tribes.
Weiss believed the ebook, printed by the College of Florida Press, would encourage constructive discourse round repatriation. Nonetheless, in her lawsuit filed on 19 October this 12 months, she argues that SJSU school launched a “marketing campaign of retaliation” in opposition to her after its launch, compromising her proper to freedom of expression.
“The repatriation of human stays is a risk to amassing scientific data,” Weiss tells The Artwork Newspaper. “Repatriation isn’t just the burying of human stays and funerary objects: it’s an ideology that locations Native American voices above these of non-Native Individuals. Thus, the narrative given by a Native American elder is favoured over the details supplied by a non-Native scientist.”
Comparable sentiments are expressed all through Weiss and Springer’s ebook, which has generated vital criticism from inside and outdoors of the college. An open letter printed by representatives of a number of worldwide universities shortly after its publication states that the views outlined therein are “antithetical to the modern follow of anthropology and actively dangerous to Indigenous folks and the strides the self-discipline has made within the final three a long time”.
Weiss alleges that an interim directive from the college that prohibits the analysis of skeletal specimens protected beneath NAGPRA and in any other case, issued in January this 12 months, victimised her analysis particularly. “Researchers who don’t work at SJSU can’t be prevented from utilizing their beforehand collected analysis or uncooked knowledge printed in theses and dissertations,” she says. “I’m the one bodily anthropology professor on the college.”
Weiss provides that tensions between her and SJSU college students and employees have escalated previously two years. She claims that she was criticised for opposing the notion {that a} deliberate Native American research programme at SJSU must be spearheaded by Native students; was blocked from accessing a scholarly database that inspired college students to quote Bipoc (Black, Indigenous and folks of color) authors; was denied sponsorship for a panel meant to debate “cancel tradition”; was denied placement on a thesis committee for analysis involving bones and was suspended from a few of her curatorial duties.
“Who tells the story is much less necessary than whether or not the story is true,” Weiss says. “Whether or not somebody is Native American or not has no precise bearing on the validity of their statements and shouldn’t decide what space of analysis they’re allowed to undertake.”
One declare that was not included within the lawsuit, in line with Weiss, is that SJSU has additionally “prolonged the plans of repatriating human stays to the burning of previously-taken x-rays”, and that there are plans to “destroy pictures and information”.
In a press release to The Artwork Newspaper, a spokesperson for SJSU claims that “adjustments to the administration of and analysis regarding collections at SJSU have been made on the route of the affected tribes, as is required [under NAGPRA] in California”, and that Weiss is “nonetheless managing all of the collections which might be held within the anthropology division and usually are not topic to NAGPRA”.
The college “has no such plans” to erase paperwork, the spokesperson says. “Moderately, we intend to repatriate or in any other case tackle such supplies as directed by the affected tribes, the Native American Heritage Fee and in any other case in accordance with state and federal legislation.”
The SJSU spokesperson provides: “Though the choose allowed the lawsuit to maneuver ahead, the ruling made clear that Weiss just isn’t permitted to second-guess state and federal legislation requiring human stays and associated objects to be returned to Indigenous tribes. No declare of retaliation can embody a change to the college’s presidential directive on the interim protocol for curation areas or a request that the courtroom interpret the scope of NAGPRA. The college denies any claims of retaliation and can proceed to vigorously defend itself on this matter.”
SJSU college students and school have repeatedly voiced issues about Weiss’s views, and final 12 months held a webinar titled “What to do When a Tenured Professor is Branded a Racist”. Within the session, which is not viewable on-line, Weiss alleges that Roberto Gonzalez, the chair of SJSU’s anthropology division, implied that he would have taken adversarial motion in opposition to Weiss if she didn’t have tenured standing and prompt she was “professionally incompetent”.
After the webinar, Weiss requested a letter from the college assuring her that she can be allowed to assign her ebook, discuss her analysis at school and entry skeletal stays for analysis functions. Her request was denied and Gonzalez didn’t retract his earlier statements.
SJSU’s stock at present lists 4 Native human stays and burial objects, in line with the NAGPRA database. Weiss emphasises that her lawsuit offers with freedom of speech, not repatriation.
“Though I disagree with each repatriation legal guidelines and the ideology behind repatriation, I’ve at all times complied with these legal guidelines,” she says. “My lawsuit just isn’t in regard to any previous or deliberate repatriations at SJSU, however relatively, the actions taken by my college for expressing my views.”
Disputes concerning freedom of speech on college campuses, fueled by partisan polarisation, have change into lightning rods for controversy lately.
