- Details
- By Chez Oxendine
- Policy and Law
Disturbed human remains have prompted the Lummi Nation to sue a local telecommunications company, Whatcom County and two federal agencies, alleging excavation work damaged ancestral burial grounds at Point Roberts in northwestern Washington.
The complaint, filed in April, alleges Whidbey Telecom continued trenching during three federally funded broadband projects in the Maple Beach area after encountering shell midden deposits and human remains at archaeological sites known as 45WH560 and 45WH525, which the tribe says contain ancestral burial grounds.
The tribe alleges violations of the Washington Indian Graves and Records Act, the National Historic Preservation Act and county permitting rules. Court filings state that “human remains were recovered from shell midden contexts during the preliminary damage assessment” and that “confirmed ancestral human remains were identified in a disturbed context.”
In a statement obtained by Native News Online, Lummi Chairman Anthony Hillaire said the case was an opportunity to protect a sacred site.
“This case is about ensuring that known burial grounds and cultural sites are treated with the respect required by law and by the fundamental principles of human dignity,” Hillaire said.
The tribe has asked for a preliminary injunction to halt all ground disturbance at Point Roberts, secure the sites and compel cooperation for a comprehensive assessment and reinterment.
A June 4 reply brief says federal defendants take no position on the injunction and that Whatcom County does not oppose injunctive relief against Whidbey Telecom.
Whidbey Telecom has asked the court to dismiss the Washington Indian Graves and Records Act claim, arguing the lawsuit was filed after the state's two-year statute of limitations expired. The company contends the complaint acknowledges the alleged disturbances were discovered between April and July 2023, placing the April 27, 2026, filing outside the statutory deadline.
The court heard arguments on the preliminary injunction June 18 and has not yet ruled. A hearing on the motion to dismiss is scheduled for July 14.
Brian Edwards contributed reporting.
