Trump administration makes major cuts to Native American boarding school research projects
The cuts are just a fraction of the grants canceled by the National Endowment for the Humanities in recent weeks as part of the Trump administration's deep cost-cutting effort across the federal government. But coming on the heels of a major federal boarding school investigation by the previous administration and an apology by then-President Joe Biden, they illustrate a seismic shift.
'If we're looking to 'Make America Great Again,' then I think it should start with the truth about the true American history,' said Deborah Parker, CEO of the National Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition.
The coalition lost more than $282,000 as a result of the cuts, halting its work to digitize more than 100,000 pages of boarding school records for its database. Parker, a citizen of the Tulalip Tribes in Washington state, said Native Americans nationwide depend on the site to find loved ones who were taken or sent to these boarding schools.
Searching that database last year, Roberta 'Birdie' Sam, a member of Tlingit & Haida, was able to confirm that her grandmother had been at a boarding school in Alaska. She also discovered that around a dozen cousins, aunts and uncles had also been at a boarding school in Oregon, including one who died there. She said the knowledge has helped her with healing.
'I understand why our relationship has been the way it has been. And that's been a great relief for myself," she said. "I've spent a lot of years very disconnected from my family, wondering what happened. And now I know — some of it anyways.'
An April 2 letter to the healing coalition that was signed by Michael McDonald, acting chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities, says the 'grant no longer effectuates the agency's needs and priorities.'
The Associated Press left messages by phone and email for the National Endowment for the Humanities. White House officials and the Office of Management and Budget also did not respond Friday to an email requesting comment.
Indigenous children were sent to boarding schools
For 150 years the U.S. removed Indigenous children from their homes and sent them away to the schools, where they were stripped of their cultures, histories and religions, and beaten for speaking their native languages.
At least 973 Native American children died at government-funded boarding schools, according to an Interior Department investigation launched by former Interior Secretary Deb Haaland. Both the report and independent researchers say the actual number was much higher.
The forced assimilation policy officially ended with the enactment of the Indian Child Welfare Act in 1978. But the government never fully investigated the boarding school system until the Biden administration.
In October, Biden apologized for the government's creation of the schools and the policies that supported them.
Haaland, a Laguna Pueblo citizen who's running for governor in New Mexico, described the recent cuts as the latest step in the Trump administration's 'pattern of hiding the full story of our country.' But she said they can't erase the extensive work already done.
'They cannot undo the healing communities felt as they told their stories at our events to hear from survivors and descendants,' she said in a statement. 'They cannot undo the investigation that brings this dark chapter of our history to light. They cannot undo the relief Native people felt when President Biden apologized on behalf of the United States.'
Boarding school research programs are feeling the strain
Among the grants terminated earlier this month was $30,000 for a project between the Koahnic Broadcast Corporation and Alaska Native Heritage Center to record and broadcast oral histories of elders in Alaska. Koahnic received an identical letter from McDonald.
Benjamin Jacuk, the Alaska Native Heritage Center's director of Indigenous research, said the news came around the same time they lost about $100,000 through a Institute of Museum and Library Services grant for curating a boarding school exhibit.
'This is a story that for all of us, we weren't able to really hear because it was so painful or for multitudes of reasons,' said Jacuk, a citizen of Kenaitze Indian Tribe. "And so it's really important right now to be able to record these stories that our elders at this point are really opening up to being able to tell.'
Former Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs Bryan Newland described the cuts as frustrating, especially given the size of the grants.
'It's not even a drop in the ocean when it comes to the federal budget,' said Newland, a citizen of the Bay Mills Indian Community (Ojibwe). 'And so it's hard to argue that this is something that's really promoting government efficiency or saving taxpayer funds.'
In April 2024, the National Endowment for the Humanities announced that it was awarding $411,000 to more than a dozen tribal nations and organizations working to illustrate the impact of these boarding schools. More than half of those awards have since been terminated.
The grant cuts were documented by the non-profit organization National Humanities Alliance.
John Campbell, a member of Tlingit and the Tulalip Tribes, said the coalition's database helped him better understand his parents, who were both boarding school survivors and 'passed on that tradition of being traumatized.'
When he was growing up, his mother used to put soap in his mouth when he said a bad word. He said he learned through the site that she experienced that punishment beginning when she was 6-years-old in a boarding school in Washington state when she would speak her language.
'She didn't talk about it that much," he said. 'She didn't want to talk about it either. It was too traumatic.'
___ Associated Press writer Terry Tang in Phoenix contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Canada's Carney spoke to Trump and discussed trade, Ottawa says
OTTAWA (Reuters) -Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney spoke to U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday and had "a productive and wide-ranging conversation" on trade challenges and other issues, Carney's office said in a statement. The leaders agreed to reconvene shortly, the statement added, but did not give details.
American Press
23 minutes ago
- American Press
Appeals court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Donald Trump
A New York appeals court on Thursday threw out the massive financial penalty a state judge imposed on President Donald Trump, while narrowly upholding a finding he engaged in fraud by exaggerating his wealth for decades. The ruling spares Trump from a potential half-billion-dollar fine but bans him and his two eldest sons from serving in corporate leadership for a few years. Trump, in a social media post, claimed 'total victory.' 'I greatly respect the fact that the Court had the Courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful Decision that was hurting Business all throughout New York State,' he wrote. The decision came seven months after the Republican returned to the White House. A sharply divided panel of five judges in New York's mid-level Appellate Division couldn't agree on many issues raised in Trump's appeal, but a majority said the monetary penalty was 'excessive.' After finding Trump flagrantly padded financial statements that went to lenders and insurers, Judge Arthur Engoron ordered him last year to pay $355 million in penalties. With interest, the sum has topped $515 million. Additional penalties levied on some other Trump Organization executives, including Trump's sons Eric and Donald Jr. — bring the total to $527 million, with interest. An 'excessive' fine 'While the injunctive relief ordered by the court is well crafted to curb defendants' business culture, the court's disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution,' Judges Dianne T. Renwick and Peter H. Moulton wrote in one of three opinions shaping the appeals court's ruling. Engoron's other punishments, upheld by the appeals court, have been on pause during Trump's appeal, and the president was able to hold off collection of the money by posting a $175 million bond. The court, which split on the merits of the lawsuit and Engoron's fraud finding, dismissed the penalty in its entirety while also leaving a pathway for an appeal to the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals. Trump and his co-defendants, the judges wrote, can seek to extend the pause on any punishments taking effect. The panel was sharply divided, issuing 323 pages of concurring and dissenting opinions with no majority. Rather, some judges endorsed parts of their colleagues' findings while denouncing others, enabling the court to rule. Two judges wrote that they felt New York Attorney General Letitia James' lawsuit against Trump and his companies was justifiable and that she had proven her case but the penalty was too severe. One wrote that James exceeded her legal authority in bringing the suit, saying that if any of Trump's lenders felt cheated, they could have sued him themselves, and none did. One judge wrote that Engoron erred by ruling before the trial began that the attorney general had proved Trump engaged in fraud. In his portion of the ruling, Judge David Friedman, who was appointed to the court by Republican Gov. George Pataki, was scathing in his criticism of James for bringing the lawsuit. 'Plainly, her ultimate goal was not 'market hygiene' … but political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump's political career and the destruction of his real estate business,' Friedman wrote. 'The voters have obviously rendered a verdict on his political career. This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business.' In a statement, James focused on the part of the case that went her way, saying the court had 'affirmed the well-supported finding of the trial court: Donald Trump, his company, and two of his children are liable for fraud.' 'It should not be lost to history: yet another court has ruled that the president violated the law, and that our case has merit,' James said. The appeals court, the Appellate Division of the state's trial court, took an unusually long time to rule, weighing Trump's appeal for nearly 11 months after oral arguments last fall. Normally, appeals are decided in a matter of weeks or a few months. Claims of politics at play Trump and his co-defendants denied wrongdoing. At the conclusion of the civil trial in January 2024, Trump said he was 'an innocent man' and the case was a 'fraud on me.' The Republican has repeatedly maintained the case and the verdict were political moves by James and Engoron, both Democrats. Trump's Justice Department has subpoenaed James for records related to the lawsuit, among other documents, as part of an investigation into whether she violated the president's civil rights. James' personal attorney Abbe D. Lowell has said investigating the fraud case is 'the most blatant and desperate example of this administration carrying out the president's political retribution campaign.' Trump and his lawyers said his financial statements weren't deceptive, since they came with disclaimers noting they weren't audited. The defense also noted bankers and insurers independently evaluated the numbers, and the loans were repaid. Despite such discrepancies as tripling the size of his Trump Tower penthouse, he said the financial statements were, if anything, lowball estimates of his fortune. During an appellate court hearing last September, Trump's lawyers argued that many of the case's allegations were too old and that James had misused a consumer protection law to sue Trump over private business transactions that were satisfactory to those involved. State attorneys said that while Trump insists no one was harmed by the financial statements, his exaggerations led lenders to make riskier loans and that honest borrowers lose out when others game their net worth numbers. Legal obstacles The civil fraud case was just one of several legal obstacles for Trump as he campaigned, won and segued to a second term as president. On Jan. 10, he was sentenced in his criminal hush money case to what's known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment. He is appealing the conviction. And in December, a federal appeals court upheld a jury's finding that Trump sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and later defamed her, affirming a $5 million judgment against him. The appeals court declined in June to reconsider. Trump still can try to get the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. Trump also is appealing a subsequent verdict that requires him to pay Carroll $83.3 million for additional defamation claims.
Los Angeles Times
23 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Uganda agrees to take deported migrants from U.S. if they don't have criminal records
KAMPALA, Uganda — Uganda has agreed to a deal with the United States to take deported migrants as long as they don't have criminal records and are not unaccompanied minors, the foreign ministry said Thursday. The ministry said in a statement that the agreement had been concluded but that terms were still being worked out. It added that Uganda prefers that the migrants sent there be of African nationalities, but did not elaborate on what Uganda might get in return for accepting deportees. The U.S. Embassy in Uganda declined to comment on what it called 'diplomatic negotiations,' but said that diplomats were seeking to uphold President Trump's 'policy of keeping Americans safe.' The Trump administration has been seeking ways to deter migrants from entering the country illegally and to deport those who already have done so, especially those with criminal records and including those who cannot easily be deported to their home country. Human rights activists criticized the deportee deal as possibly going against international law. Henry Okello Oryem, Uganda's state minister for foreign affairs, on Wednesday had denied that any agreement on deportees had been reached, though he said his government was in discussions about 'visas, tariffs, sanctions, and related issues.' He also suggested that his country would draw the line at accepting people associated with criminal groups. 'We are talking about cartels: people who are unwanted in their own countries. How can we integrate them into local communities in Uganda?' he said at the time. Oryem and other Ugandan government officials declined to comment Thursday. Opposition lawmaker Muwada Nkunyingi suggested that such a deal with the United States would give the Ugandan government legitimacy ahead of elections, and urged Washington not to turn a blind eye toward what he described as human rights and governance issues in Uganda. Uganda's leaders will rush into a deal to 'clear their image now that we are heading into the 2026 elections,' Nkunyingi said. Human rights lawyer Nicholas Opio likened a deportee deal to human trafficking, and said it would leave the status of the deportees unclear. 'Are they refugees or prisoners?' he said. 'The proposed deal runs afoul of international law. We are sacrificing human beings for political expediency; in this case because Uganda wants to be in the good books of the United States,' he said. 'That I can keep your prisoners if you pay me; how is that different from human trafficking?' In July, the U.S. deported five men with criminal backgrounds to the southern African kingdom of Eswatini and sent eight more to South Sudan. The men from Cuba, Jamaica, Laos, Yemen and Vietnam sent to Eswatini are being held in solitary confinement until they can be deported to their home countries, which could take up to a year. A legal challenge in the U.S had halted the deportation process of the eight men in South Sudan but a Supreme Court ruling eventually cleared the way for them to be sent to South Sudan. Uganda has had challenges with the U.S. after lawmakers passed an anti-homosexuality bill in 2023 that punishes consensual same-sex conduct with penalties including life imprisonment. Washington threatened consequences and the World Bank withheld some funding. In May 2024, the U.S. imposed sanctions on Uganda's parliamentary speaker, her husband and several other officials over corruption and serious abuses of human rights.
