Antiscientific Laws? A Brief Defence of Repatriation Laws
1 Department of Social and Philosophical Inquiry, School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Arts, Social Sciences and Education, University of New England, Armidale Campus, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia
* Correspondence author:
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 16 Apr 2025 / Accepted: 27 Oct 2025 / Published: 11 Nov 2025
Abstract
Weiss’s paper argues that repatriation laws prevent further research and new scientific knowledge, particularly in anthropology. For Weiss and others, these laws are unscientific. In this commentary, I offer a brief defence of repatriation laws. I argue that these laws prevent further significant historical harms and trauma that can result from research on Native American remains and that researchers ought to embrace such laws. Furthermore, I suggest we have reason to be sceptical about Weiss’s argument.
Keywords: repatriation laws; NAGPRA; repair; Native Americans; antiscientific
OPEN ACCESS
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).
CITE
Munday, H. Antiscientific Laws? A Brief Defence of Repatriation Laws. Controversial_Ideas 2025, 5, 23.
Munday H. Antiscientific Laws? A Brief Defence of Repatriation Laws. Journal of Controversial Ideas. 2025; 5(3):23.
Munday, Harrison. 2025. "Antiscientific Laws? A Brief Defence of Repatriation Laws." Controversial_Ideas 5, no. 3: 23.
Not implemented
SHARE
