Native leaders press for more action to address crisis of missing, murdered Indigenous people
As Utah lawmakers weigh legislation to maintain the task force investigating the disproportionately high number of missing and murdered Indigenous people, a coalition of Native American leaders gathered to say such action is needed.
"We're here today because our work is far from finished," said Kassie John, one of several speakers who addressed a conference Thursday focused on the issue. "The crisis of missing and murdered Indigenous relatives continues to devastate families across not just Utah but the United States as well. Our communities cannot bear this burden alone. We need everyone's support. We need your support. We need our state and local officials' support."
State lawmakers created the Murdered and Missing Indigenous Relatives Task Force in 2020, and the body issued a report in late 2023 highlighting the disparate rates of missing and murdered Native Americans in Utah, an issue that extends to the national level. Among one of the oft-repeated stats from the report, cited at Thursday's conference, is that though American Indian and Alaska Native people account for around 1.6% of Utah's population, they account for more than 5% of murder victims.
A measure is up for consideration in the Utah Legislature, HB15, to extend the task force's duties, which were to have ended last November, until July 1, 2027. But while supportive of the task force's efforts, the participants at Thursday's conference, held at the state Capitol in Salt Lake City, emphasized that additional action is needed on top of that.
The efforts "can't just be in legislation. It has to be an action, a collaboration, an unwavering commitment to justice for Indigenous people," said John, Miss Indian World 2024-25 and a member of the Navajo Nation.
Separately, but also in the Capitol Thursday, Utah Rep. Angela Romero organized a rally to promote HB30, the Indian Family Preservation Act, meant to bolster the role of tribal officials in foster care cases involving Native American children. Romero, D-Salt Lake City, is the sponsor of HB15 and HB30.
"Tribes want to be at the table to know where their citizens are going," said Tamra Borchardt-Slayton, health director of the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah and a speaker at the HB30 rally.
Dena Ned, a member of the board of directors of Restoring Ancestral Winds Inc., or RAWI, the group that hosted the conference on the missing and murdered Indigenous people issue, called on participants of the event to join the cause. Those in the room, she said, are "going to help make the change happen."
Yolanda Francisco, the executive director of Restoring Ancestral Winds Inc., which is focused on ending violence in Native communities, also emphasized the importance of collective attention and action to the issue. The help of tribal representatives, Utah lawmakers and others working together is vital. "May our voices resonate with others and give peace, safety and healing to Native communities so that one day we can live and thrive in society without fear and truly be free from violence," Francisco said.
The 2023 report outlined some of the issues that might factor in the higher rates of missing and murdered people in the Indigenous community. It also outlined a range of recommendations to address the issue, including stronger ties between tribal and state law enforcement officials and medical examiners.
HB15 calls for another report by Sept. 30, 2026, looking into new ways to approach unsolved cases of missing and murdered people and ways to increase outreach to communities most impacted by the issue, among other things. The measure received a favorable recommendation from the House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee on Wednesday and now awaits consideration by the full House.
HB30 hasn't yet gotten a committee hearing, but its proponents are pressing for action. Borchardt-Slayton said the bill is important as it would give tribal representatives added assurance they would have a role in foster care cases involving Native American children, something that doesn't always occur. "You have to remember, in the state of Utah as of 2022, 4% of (child) removal cases were actually Native American, and we only make up 1.6% of the population of the state of Utah," she said.
Queried on HB30, House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, said he understands the federal government addressed the issues at play. He views the state proposal as "duplicative" of action federal lawmakers have already taken.
"Not to say that it may not get heard," Schultz said, but the issue is "something the federal government addressed last year."
Contributing: Bridger Beal-Cvetko
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
3 hours ago
US Justice Department says Trump can cancel national monuments that protect landscapes
BILLINGS, Mont. -- Lawyers for President Donald Trump's administration say he has the authority to abolish national monuments meant to protect historical and archaeological sites across broad landscapes, including two in California created by his predecessor at the request of Native American tribes. A Justice Department legal opinion released Tuesday disavowed a 1938 determination that monuments created by previous presidents under the Antiquities Act can't be revoked. The department said presidents can cancel monument designations if protections aren't warranted. The finding comes as the Interior Department under Trump weighs changes to monuments across the nation as part of the administration's push to expand U.S. energy production. Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Natural Resources Committee, said that at Trump's order, 'his Justice Department is attempting to clear a path to erase national monuments." Trump in his first term reduced the size of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase Escalante National Monuments in Utah, calling them a 'massive land grab." He also lifted fishing restrictions within a sprawling marine monument off the New England Coast. Former President Joe Biden reversed the moves and restored the monuments. The two monuments singled out in the newly released Justice Department opinion were designated by Biden in his final days in office: Chuckwalla National Monument, in Southern California near Joshua Tree National Park, and Sáttítla Highlands National Monument, in Northern California. The Democrat's declarations for the monuments barred oil and natural gas drilling and mining on the 624,000-acre (2,400-square-kilometer) Chuckwalla site, and the roughly 225,000 acres (800 square kilometers) Sáttítla Highlands site near the California-Oregon border. Chuckwalla has natural wonders including the Painted Canyon of Mecca Hills and Alligator Rock, and is home to rare species of plants and animals like the desert bighorn sheep and the Chuckwalla lizard. The Sáttítla Highlands include the ancestral homelands of the Pit River Tribe and Modoc Peoples. All but three presidents have used the 1906 Antiquities Act to protect unique landscapes and cultural resources. About half the national parks in the U.S. were first designated as monuments. But critics of monument designations under Biden and Obama say the protective boundaries were stretched too far, hindering mining for critical minerals. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lanora Pettit wrote in the Trump administration opinion that Biden's protections of Chuckwalla and the Sattítla Highlands were part of the Democrat's attempts to create for himself an environmental legacy that includes more places to hike, bike, camp or hunt. "Such activities are entirely expected in a park, but they are wholly unrelated to (if not outright incompatible with) the protection of scientific or historical monuments," Pettit wrote. Trump in April lifted commercial fishing prohibitions within an expansive marine monument in the Pacific Ocean created under former President Barack Obama. Environmental groups said Tuesday's Justice Department opinion doesn't give him the authority to shrink monuments at will. 'Americans overwhelmingly support our public lands and oppose seeing them dismantled or destroyed,' said Axie Navas with The Wilderness Society. Biden established 10 new monuments, among them the site of a 1908 race riot in Springfield, Illinois, and another on a sacred Native American site near the Grand Canyon. Since 1912, presidents have issued more than a dozen proclamations that diminished monuments, according to a National Park Service database. Dwight Eisenhower was most active in undoing the proclamations of his predecessors as he diminished six monuments, including Arches in Utah, Great Sand Dunes in Colorado and Glacier Bay in Alaska, which have all since become national parks. Trump's moves to shrink the Utah monuments in his first term were challenged by environmental groups that said protections for the sites safeguard water supplies and wildlife while preserving cultural sites. The reductions were reversed by Biden before the case was resolved, and it remains pending. President Theodore Roosevelt signed the Antiquities Act after lobbying by educators and scientists who wanted to protect sites from artifact looting and haphazard collecting by individuals. It was the first law in the U.S. to establish legal protections for cultural and natural resources of historic or scientific interest on federal lands.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
LI school to dish out $23M to replace its ‘Thunderbirds' logo due to statewide ban — despite lawsuit to keep it
A school district on Long Island estimates it'll spend a ludicrous $23 million to erase its 'Thunderbirds' team name — as it's forced to comply with a state ban on Native American logos and imagery. Connetquot, whose baseball team recently won the Suffolk County championship, has been in quiet communication with the state of New York and expects to entirely phase out its longtime moniker by March of next year, according to documents obtained by The Post. 'The District has invested significant funds in larger-scale athletic costs at the high school and middle schools without the Thunderbirds name or imagery,' Superintendent Joseph Centamore wrote to Dave Frank, assistant commissioner of the state Department of Education. 'These costs included the replacement of turf fields, indoor gym floors and equipment, and other fixtures, as well as repainting projects throughout the schools totaling $23,620,000,' he said in the letter, dated May 6. Connetquot will also have to spend 'an additional $323,470.42' on 'scorers' tables, cheer equipment, wall pads, scoreboards, additional uniforms, and certain banners and signage.' The district declined to comment. The Thunderbirds, which use no relevant imagery, shares its name with a Canadian Hockey League team based outside Seattle and an Air Force demonstration squadron that performs at Jones Beach. The district has been fighting in court since 2023 with fellow Native American-named districts on Long Island, including Massapequa, Wantagh and Wyandanch. However, a chief justice dismissed the suit in March, but only Massapequa amended its complaint to keep the fight going. President Trump intervened in April, declaring 'LONG LIVE THE MASSAPEQUA CHIEFS!' and ordered Secretary of Education Linda McMahon to investigate the issue at a national level. Despite the presidential support, Centamore's recent letter requested an extension beyond the June 30 deadline set by the Board of Regents to comply with the state ban. He added that the school has been rebranding for the past five years and 'has completed at least 75% of the necessary work for compliance.' The district was granted a year's extension last week. On paper, Wantagh is also backing off and allocated a staggering $418,000 'for the purpose of working on mascot-related projects,' according to a deadline extension request Superintendent John C. McNamara sent to Frank on April 24. The true cost will be closer to $700,000 for Wantagh, which has 2,850 students from kindergarten through 12th grade, according to a representative. 'Simultaneously, the district remains committed to preserving our 'Warrior' name,' the school board wrote in a recent community letter after their 2026 extension was recently approved. 'The extension granted to our district is significant as it allows us more time not only for thoughtful implementation if needed, but also for the legal proceedings concerning our appeal to reach a resolution.' The fight continues for Massapequa and its Chiefs team, with McMahon recently pledging federal intervention and calling the ban a civil rights issue because it singles out Native American culture. Massapequa is expecting to have to pay roughly $1 million if it's forced to rebrand as part of the ban, which threatened schools by saying those who don't comply would face loss of state funding and other sanctions. The district's homegrown Harvard lawyer, one-time Chief Oliver Roberts, is now sending a letter to New York's Indigenous Mascot Advisory Group, demanding an extension for Massapequa. Roberts wrote that the state is 'compelled to extend its enforcement deadlines' on behalf of McMahon's federal findings that fall under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. 'The District cannot, under any circumstances, lawfully engage in discriminatory conduct against Indigenous individuals, groups, students, employees, or residents, 'he wrote. 'Nor can it erase or suppress Indigenous cultural identity at the direction of the Regents,' Roberts added, signing the letter, 'Once a Chief, always a Chief.' Frank responded last week to the federal government's discriminatory findings — and threat to involve the Justice Department — in a letter that suggests expanding the ban to all ethnic team names the state deems offensive. 'That's their workaround … we've demonstrated that this regulation was not a good idea,' Massapequa School Board President Kerry Wachter told The Post at a 'Save The Chiefs' rally Saturday. 'Now you're wanting to put another unfunded mandate on top of all these districts who are just barely making it, just to not give Massapequa the win?'
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Ditched by Trump's EEOC, job applicant advances bias lawsuit against Sheetz
This story was originally published on HR Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily HR Dive newsletter. A Black job applicant who alleged that gas station chain Sheetz disproportionately screened out Black, Native American, Alaskan Native and multiracial applicants moved to continue his case June 5 after the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission abandoned it. EEOC filed a class-action lawsuit in April 2024 alleging that Sheetz maintained a longstanding practice of screening all job applicants for past criminal convictions and rejected those with such records. This practice violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, EEOC said in a press release, because it had a disparate impact on applicants of certain racial backgrounds. However, the agency moved to have the case dismissed last week because it determined that the disparate-impact claims would conflict with President Donald Trump's April 23 executive order directing agencies to cease enforcement of such claims. EEOC asked the court to defer dismissal of its claims by 60 days to allow the commission to notify class members so that they could obtain private representation. The legality of Trump's executive order on disparate-impact claims proved contentious, with one of EEOC's own administrative judges calling the order 'highly illegal.' But the June 5 filing in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania is one of the first examples in which the order has been put into practice. Trump said the end of disparate-impact liability enforcement was necessary because it inhibited businesses from hiring applicants on the basis of merit and skill. He also said that disparate-impact liability is unconstitutional and 'threatens the commitment to merit and equality of opportunity that forms the foundation of the American Dream.' The push to end disparate-impact liability is one of the goals stated by the conservative Heritage Foundation in its 'Project 2025' presidential transition document. The organization wrote that the concept should be thrown out because under disparate-impact theory, 'discriminatory motive or intent is irrelevant; the outcome is what matters. But all workplaces have disparities.' That logic has been met with resistance by former Democratic officials of the U.S. Department of Labor and EEOC, who said in May that disparate-impact liability is explicitly outlawed under Title VII and has been upheld by U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The former officials cautioned employers that they should avoid following Trump's executive order so they do not violate federal laws. 'Disparate impact liability is a necessary element of advancing equal opportunity for all, consistent with America's national commitment to equal justice,' the officials wrote. In a press release, plaintiff-side firm Outten & Golden, which is partly representing the job applicant in the Sheetz case, said EEOC had spent nearly a decade investigating the claims at issue and had found a basis to allege evidence of systemic discrimination. 'Our client has a right to be judged on his qualifications, and not to be denied a livelihood by policies that exclude people with stale convictions that are unrelated to the job,' said Ben Geffen, senior attorney at the Public Interest Law Center and a co-representative for the plaintiff, said in the press release. 'When the government steps back, we step in. We will not allow political interference to wipe out hard-won legal protections.' A similar dynamic played out following EEOC's abandonment of several lawsuits it filed on behalf of transgender workers alleging discrimination following an executive order from Trump. Advocacy groups have since filed to intervene on behalf of plaintiffs in those cases. Recommended Reading Shell Oil did not discriminate in hiring decision, 5th Cir. says
