Fury as Council of Trump Loyalists Votes to Steamroll Historic Preservation Law
"At its core, the revisions strip communities of their right to be heard."
Preservationists are reacting with fury after allies of President Donald Trump moved to weaken federal restrictions on construction projects built on historic sites.
Trump-appointed members of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) on Friday voted move forward with rules that would weaken Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires the federal government to both evaluate how construction projects might impact protected places and to consult with people and groups affected by such projects, including Tribal Nations.
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, on Monday ripped Trump for stacking the council with loyalists who appear determined to "tear down the safeguards that protect America's history so he and his billionaire friends can build whatever they want, wherever they want."
"Right now, a developer has to stop and listen before paving over a tribal burial ground, a Revolutionary War battlefield, or the church where your grandparents were married," Huffman added. "Trump's council wants to end that and cut tribal nations, states, counties, towns, and communities out of that conversation entirely."
Greg Werkheiser, founding partner at the law firm Cultural Heritage Partners, said in an interview with NPR published on Friday that the vote amounted to an "attempt to gut historic preservation protections."
"There are millions of these sites in this country," Werkheiser emphasized, "and all of them are made less protected by this effort by the Trump administration."
The American Institute of Architects (AIA) on Monday denounced the council's vote, describing it as "a significant step back for historic preservation, community participation, and the inclusive design processes that serve the public good."
"At its core, the revisions strip communities of their right to be heard," said the AIA. "These revisions place approximately 1.4 million historic sites at greater risk by shifting decisions away from the communities where they are rooted. The revisions make public comment optional rather than mandatory, narrow the definition of historic property, and shift decision-making authority almost entirely to federal agencies—sidelining state historic preservation officers, tribal historic preservation officers, tribes, and local governments."
Michaela Pavlat, manager for the National Parks Conservation Association Indigenous Partnerships Program, said the Friday vote was a "calculated, yet unwarranted attack on tribal consultation, historic preservation, and the regulations that have protected the places that tell our country’s diverse stories."
Gussie Lord, managing attorney for tribal partnerships at Earthjustice, noted that the National Historic Preservation Act "has not slowed the pace of new roads and power plants in this country, but it has given Tribes a seat at the table and preserved irreplaceable Indigenous sites from destruction."
"What happens when entire landscapes are bulldozed without a thought to their cultural and historic importance?" Lord asked. "No one should support cutting Tribes out of the decision-making process for projects that impact their rights and sacred places."
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
Preservationists are reacting with fury after allies of President Donald Trump moved to weaken federal restrictions on construction projects built on historic sites.
Trump-appointed members of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) on Friday voted move forward with rules that would weaken Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires the federal government to both evaluate how construction projects might impact protected places and to consult with people and groups affected by such projects, including Tribal Nations.
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, on Monday ripped Trump for stacking the council with loyalists who appear determined to "tear down the safeguards that protect America's history so he and his billionaire friends can build whatever they want, wherever they want."
"Right now, a developer has to stop and listen before paving over a tribal burial ground, a Revolutionary War battlefield, or the church where your grandparents were married," Huffman added. "Trump's council wants to end that and cut tribal nations, states, counties, towns, and communities out of that conversation entirely."
Greg Werkheiser, founding partner at the law firm Cultural Heritage Partners, said in an interview with NPR published on Friday that the vote amounted to an "attempt to gut historic preservation protections."
"There are millions of these sites in this country," Werkheiser emphasized, "and all of them are made less protected by this effort by the Trump administration."
The American Institute of Architects (AIA) on Monday denounced the council's vote, describing it as "a significant step back for historic preservation, community participation, and the inclusive design processes that serve the public good."
"At its core, the revisions strip communities of their right to be heard," said the AIA. "These revisions place approximately 1.4 million historic sites at greater risk by shifting decisions away from the communities where they are rooted. The revisions make public comment optional rather than mandatory, narrow the definition of historic property, and shift decision-making authority almost entirely to federal agencies—sidelining state historic preservation officers, tribal historic preservation officers, tribes, and local governments."
Michaela Pavlat, manager for the National Parks Conservation Association Indigenous Partnerships Program, said the Friday vote was a "calculated, yet unwarranted attack on tribal consultation, historic preservation, and the regulations that have protected the places that tell our country’s diverse stories."
Gussie Lord, managing attorney for tribal partnerships at Earthjustice, noted that the National Historic Preservation Act "has not slowed the pace of new roads and power plants in this country, but it has given Tribes a seat at the table and preserved irreplaceable Indigenous sites from destruction."
"What happens when entire landscapes are bulldozed without a thought to their cultural and historic importance?" Lord asked. "No one should support cutting Tribes out of the decision-making process for projects that impact their rights and sacred places."
- 'Unconscionable': Trump Looks to Gut Protections for National Monuments ›
- Comparing Trump Admin to Ministry of Truth in Orwell's 1984, Judge Orders Slavery Exhibits Restored ›
- Trump Guts Two National Monuments 'At the Behest of Polluting Corporations Who Seek to Ravage Them' ›
- Opinion | A Grand Prix to the Bottom: Trump’s $183 Billion Attack on American Culture and Heritage | Common Dreams ›
Preservationists are reacting with fury after allies of President Donald Trump moved to weaken federal restrictions on construction projects built on historic sites.
Trump-appointed members of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) on Friday voted move forward with rules that would weaken Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires the federal government to both evaluate how construction projects might impact protected places and to consult with people and groups affected by such projects, including Tribal Nations.
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, on Monday ripped Trump for stacking the council with loyalists who appear determined to "tear down the safeguards that protect America's history so he and his billionaire friends can build whatever they want, wherever they want."
"Right now, a developer has to stop and listen before paving over a tribal burial ground, a Revolutionary War battlefield, or the church where your grandparents were married," Huffman added. "Trump's council wants to end that and cut tribal nations, states, counties, towns, and communities out of that conversation entirely."
Greg Werkheiser, founding partner at the law firm Cultural Heritage Partners, said in an interview with NPR published on Friday that the vote amounted to an "attempt to gut historic preservation protections."
"There are millions of these sites in this country," Werkheiser emphasized, "and all of them are made less protected by this effort by the Trump administration."
The American Institute of Architects (AIA) on Monday denounced the council's vote, describing it as "a significant step back for historic preservation, community participation, and the inclusive design processes that serve the public good."
"At its core, the revisions strip communities of their right to be heard," said the AIA. "These revisions place approximately 1.4 million historic sites at greater risk by shifting decisions away from the communities where they are rooted. The revisions make public comment optional rather than mandatory, narrow the definition of historic property, and shift decision-making authority almost entirely to federal agencies—sidelining state historic preservation officers, tribal historic preservation officers, tribes, and local governments."
Michaela Pavlat, manager for the National Parks Conservation Association Indigenous Partnerships Program, said the Friday vote was a "calculated, yet unwarranted attack on tribal consultation, historic preservation, and the regulations that have protected the places that tell our country’s diverse stories."
Gussie Lord, managing attorney for tribal partnerships at Earthjustice, noted that the National Historic Preservation Act "has not slowed the pace of new roads and power plants in this country, but it has given Tribes a seat at the table and preserved irreplaceable Indigenous sites from destruction."
"What happens when entire landscapes are bulldozed without a thought to their cultural and historic importance?" Lord asked. "No one should support cutting Tribes out of the decision-making process for projects that impact their rights and sacred places."
- 'Unconscionable': Trump Looks to Gut Protections for National Monuments ›
- Comparing Trump Admin to Ministry of Truth in Orwell's 1984, Judge Orders Slavery Exhibits Restored ›
- Trump Guts Two National Monuments 'At the Behest of Polluting Corporations Who Seek to Ravage Them' ›
- Opinion | A Grand Prix to the Bottom: Trump’s $183 Billion Attack on American Culture and Heritage | Common Dreams ›