PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 12, 2017
Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony Act of 2017
This bill amends the federal criminal code to double the maximum prison term (from 5 years to 10 years) for persons convicted of selling, purchasing, using for profit, or transporting for sale or profit the human remains of Native Americans or cultural items obtained in violation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.
The bill prohibits the export of Native American cultural items that were obtained in violation of the Act, Native American archaeological resources that were obtained in violation of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, or Native American objects of antiquity that were obtained in violation of the criminal code. Violators may be subject to fines, imprisonment, or both.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The Department of the Interior and the Department of State must each designate a liaison to facilitate and hold trainings and workshops on the voluntary return of human remains or cultural items.
Interior must refer individuals and organizations to Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations to facilitate the voluntary return of human remains or cultural items.
In addition, Interior must convene a tribal working group consisting of representatives of tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations to provide advice on issues concerning the return of, and illegal trade in, human remains or cultural items.
People & committees
Rep. Luján, Ben Ray [D-NM-3] · D–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 4, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3211 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3211 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3211 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3211 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.