Chickamauga Nation discuss findings of archeological study, opposing Franklin County prison
CHARLESTON, Ark. (KNWA/KFTA) — As the controversial proposed prison in Franklin County persists in the state legislature, one native tribe continues to oppose the land it will be built on.
On Monday, the Chickamauga Nation held a press conference to announce its findings after conducting its own archeological survey of the site where the proposed prison will be built in Franklin County.
Chickamauga Chief Jimmie Kersh says their findings show the existence of stone box graves, arrowheads and other hunting equipment on the proposed site, found by Dr. David Jurney.
The Arkansas Department of Corrections (DOC), the group overseeing the construction of the proposed prison, acknowledged that concerns about a possible Native American burial site were raised early in the planning process.
The DOC released a statement in March that says it has been 'mindful of these concerns' and has completed preliminary assessments and has found 'no evidence of a burial site to date.'
Chickamauga Nation raises concerns over Franklin County prison site
The U.S. Department of the Interior does not recognize the Chickamauga as one of 547 federally recognized tribes.
However, Chief Kursh, claims the Chickamauga people have rights to the land with a vast history in North America.
He is now calling on the community to submit public records requests to force the government to make public its study.
The conference was held on the same day that Senate Bill 354 failed to pass for the fourth time. The bill would allocate $750 million to construct the prison.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Native American boarding school funding under scrutiny in lawsuit
Native American boarding school funding under scrutiny in lawsuit The lawsuit filed by the Wichita and Washoe tribes demands an accounting of an estimated $23.3 billion in misappropriated funds. Show Caption Hide Caption US apologizes for the first time for abuses at Native schools President Joe Biden formally apologized for the abuses committed against Native boarding school students over the past century. Two tribal nations are suing the U.S. government for misusing trust funds meant for Native children's education to finance abusive boarding schools. The lawsuit demands an accounting of an estimated $23.3 billion and details of how the funds were used. The lawsuit follows Interior Department reports detailing abuses and deaths within the boarding school system. Two tribal nations are suing the United States government, saying it misappropriated trust funds to finance the Federal Indian Boarding School program, using monies meant to support Native Nations to instead fuel a system of abuse that spawned generations of trauma, despair and social ills. The Wichita and Affiliated Tribes and the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California say financing for the boarding school program included Native trust funds taken 'for the supposed purpose of providing money to support Native children's education.' The tribes are demanding a federal accounting of an estimated $23.3 billion in funding taken from those funds, saying the government has never detailed how the monies were used. The lawsuit was filed last month in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, where one of the boarding school system's most notorious campuses – the Carlisle Indian Industrial School – once operated. 'The United States took upon itself the sacred trusteeship over Native children's education – a trust responsibility that has remained unbroken for 200 years,' said Adam Levitt, founding partner of DiCello Levitt, one of four law firms representing the tribes, in a news release. 'At the very least, the United States has a legal and moral obligation to account for the Boarding School Program, including a detailed explanation of the funds that it took and spent.' Federal trust responsibility 'was born of a sacred bargain,' according to the lawsuit. Through numerous treaties, Native Nations promised peace and ceded land; in exchange, the U.S. would provide for the education of their children. 'The land was ceded; the peace was a mirage,' the lawsuit said. 'And the primary victims of decades of ongoing statutory and treaty violations were the Native Nations' children.' The lawsuit names Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, the Interior Department, the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Indian Education as defendants. Alyse Sharpe, a spokesperson for the Department of the Interior, told USA TODAY the agency as a matter of policy does not comment on litigation. 'The Department of the Interior remains committed to our trust responsibilities of protecting tribal treaty rights, lands, assets, and resources, in addition to its duty to carry out the mandates of federal law with respect to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and villages,' Sharpe said. A shameful chapter in US history More than 18,000 children, some as young as 4, were shipped off to 417 federal boarding schools, many run by religious organizations, between 1819 and 1969. The system's detrimental effects were both immediate and long-lasting. Under Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, the department's first Native American director, the agency released reports in 2022 and 2024 detailing the program's abuses, including death, forced labor and physical and sexual abuse. The investigation confirmed the deaths of at least 973 American Indian, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian children in the boarding school system. According to the lawsuit, the program sought to destroy children's links to their Indigenous families, language and cultural practices, depriving them of skills necessary to participate and succeed in their own communities, indoctrinating them into menial positions and more broadly breeding cycles of poverty, violence and drug addiction. 'The Boarding School Program represents one of the most shameful chapters in American history,' Serrell Smokey, chairman of the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California, said in the news release. 'Our children were taken from us, subjected to unimaginable horrors, and forced to fund their own suffering. This lawsuit seeks to hold the U.S. government accountable for its actions and to ensure that the truth is finally brought to light.' The lawsuit says the program was not only 'a national disgrace' but violated the government's duty to provide Native children with an education, an obligation that continues today based on a 'unique and continuing trust relationship with and responsibility to the Indian people for the education of Indian children.' 'The Boarding School Program inflicted profound and lasting harm on our communities,' said Amber Silverhorn-Wolfe, president of the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes. 'We are seeking justice not only for the survivors but also for the generations that continue to suffer from the intergenerational trauma caused by these schools.' Faith E. Gay of Selendy Gay, another firm representing the tribes, noted the Interior Department reports revealed not only the scale and scope of the government's actions but that key information related to program financing remains under federal control. Those reports said the boarding school system was part of a pattern of forced assimilation policies pursued or allowed by the U.S. for nearly two centuries and recommended an official apology. President Joe Biden formally apologized for the program in October. 'The harm inflicted by the Boarding School Program endures in the broken families and poor mental and physical health of survivors of the Boarding Schools and their descendants,' the tribal lawsuit reads. 'It endures in the cycles of poverty, desperation, domestic violence, and addiction that were born of the Boarding School Program. It endures in the silence of lost language and culture, and … in the missing remains and unmarked graves of the children who died.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Why are the flags at half-staff in Wisconsin today?
Gov. Tony Evers has ordered flags to fly at half-staff in honor of former Oneida Nation Chairman Gerald L "Jerry" Danforth, who died June 1 at age 78. 'Chairman Danforth led the Oneida Nation with integrity, dedication and a deep commitment to upholding and protecting Tribal sovereignty and culture,' Evers said in a news release. Services for Danforth will be held June 7 at the Oneida Turtle School, N7125 Seminary Road in Oneida, according to the release. Flags will be at half-staff from sunrise to sunset June 7. The U.S. flag and Wisconsin flag will be flown at half-staff at all buildings, grounds and military installations of Wisconsin, according to the release. Danforth served two terms as chairman of the Oneida Nation, and was first elected in 1999 and then again in 2005. "As chairman, Danforth prioritized Indian gaming interest and economic development, as well as issues around health care, higher education, Oneida language preservation and expanding communication between the state and the Native Nations," according to the release. Flags are usually flown at half-staff after national tragedies or deaths of government officials, military members or other first responders. Flags can also be at half-staff for Memorial Day or other national days of remembrance, according to This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Why are flags at half-staff in Wisconsin today, June 7?
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘Prudent remedy' for veto error is special session, Legislative Council advises
Gov. Kelly Armstrong speaks during a meeting of the Senate Appropriations Committee on March 27, 2025. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor) Legal staff for North Dakota's legislative branch concluded the 'prudent remedy' to correct an error with Gov. Kelly Armstrong's line-item veto would be for the governor to call a special session, according to a memo issued Friday. But Attorney General Drew Wrigley, who is working on a separate opinion, maintains that Legislative Council has no role in determining the execution of the governor's veto. Armstrong announced May 22 a 'markup error' with a line-item veto that crossed out $35 million for a state housing development fund. The red X over the funding did not match what Armstrong indicated in his veto message that explained his reasoning. North Dakota governor unintentionally vetoes $35 million for housing programs A Legislative Council memo distributed to lawmakers Friday concluded that legal precedent supports the marked-up bill as the official veto document. 'Engaging in interpretive gymnastics' to disregard the markings on the bill could lead to unintended consequences in the future, Legislative Council concluded. Emily Thompson, legal division director for Legislative Council, said the Legislature needs to have an objective document to clearly illustrate what was vetoed, such as the specific veto markings on the bill, so lawmakers can exercise their veto override authority effectively. Lawmakers have six days remaining in their 80-day limit and could call themselves back into session to address the veto. However, the memo cautions that the Legislature may need those days to reconvene to respond to federal funding issues or other unforeseen reasons. Legislative Council recommends the governor call a special session, which would not count against the 80-day limit. A special session of the Legislature costs about $65,000 per day, according to Legislative Council. Armstrong is waiting for an attorney general's opinion to determine the next steps, according to a statement from his office. He previously said he would call a special session if necessary. Wrigley said Friday it's up to his office to assess the situation and issue an opinion on the governor's question. 'The power in question is strictly the governor's power and it has to be in compliance with the constitution and laws of North Dakota,' Wrigley said. 'That's the only assessment here. There's no role for this in Legislative Council. They have no authority in this regard.' Armstrong on May 19 issued two line-item vetoes in Senate Bill 2014, the budget for the state Industrial Commission. His veto message explained his reasons for objecting to a $150,000 one-time grant for a Native American-focused organization to fund a homelessness liaison position. But the marking also crossed out $25 million for housing projects and programs and $10 million to combat homelessness, which he later said he did not intend to veto. Chris Joseph, general counsel for Armstrong, wrote in a request for an attorney general's opinion that the markings served as a 'color-coded visual aid,' and the veto message should control the extent of the veto. Wrigley said his office is working on the opinion and aware that resolution of the issue is time sensitive. Bills passed by the Legislature with appropriations attached to them, such as the Industrial Commission budget, go into effect July 1. 'I look forward to publishing my opinion on that at the earliest possible time,' he said. The Legislative Council memo states, 'It would not be appropriate to allow the governor and attorney general to resolve the ambiguity by agreement.' In addition, Legislative Council concluded that if the governor's veto message is to be considered the controlling document for vetoes in the future, more ambiguities would likely be 'inevitable and frequent' and require resolution through the courts. The memo cites a 2018 North Dakota Supreme Court opinion involving a case between the Legislature and then-Gov. Doug Burgum that ruled 'a veto is complete and irrevocable upon return of the vetoed bill to the originating house,' and further stated the governor does not have the power to 'withdraw a veto.' 'Setting a precedent of the attorney general issuing a letter saying we can just go ahead and interpret the governor's veto message to mean what was, or was not, vetoed, that's a really concerning precedent to set,' Thompson said in an interview. Wrigley said any issues resulting from the opinion could be addressed by the courts. 'I sincerely hope that they (Legislative Council) are not trying to somehow publicly advocate, or attempt to influence a process for which they have no role,' Wrigley said. Legislative Council memo SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
