• About
    • Mission
    • Team
    • Boards
    • Mentions & Testimonials
    • Institutional Recognition
    • Annual Reports
    • Current & Past Sponsors
    • Contact Us
  • Resources
    • Article Collection
    • Podcast: Art in Brief
    • AML and the Art Market
    • AI and Art Authentication
    • Newsletter
      • Subscribe
      • Archives
      • In Brief
    • Art Law Library
    • Movies
    • Nazi-looted Art Restitution Database
    • Global Network
      • Courses and Programs
      • Artists’ Assistance
      • Bar Associations
      • Legal Sources
      • Law Firms
      • Student Societies
      • Research Institutions
    • Additional resources
      • The “Interview” Project
  • Events
    • Worldwide Calendar
    • Our Events
      • All Events
      • Annual Conferences
        • 2025 Art Law Conference
        • 2024 Art Law Conference
        • 2023 Art Law Conference
        • 2022 Art Law Conference
        • 2015 Art Law Conference
  • Programs
    • Visual Artists’ Legal Clinics
      • Art & Copyright Law Clinic
      • Artist-Dealer Relationships Clinic
      • Artist Legacy and Estate Planning Clinic
      • Visual Artists’ Immigration Clinic
    • Summer School
      • 2026
      • 2025
    • Internship and Fellowship
    • Judith Bresler Fellowship
  • Case Law Database
  • Log in
  • Become a Member
  • Donate
  • Log in
  • Become a Member
  • Donate
Center for Art Law
  • About
    About
    • Mission
    • Team
    • Boards
    • Mentions & Testimonials
    • Institutional Recognition
    • Annual Reports
    • Current & Past Sponsors
    • Contact Us
  • Resources
    Resources
    • Article Collection
    • Podcast: Art in Brief
    • AML and the Art Market
    • AI and Art Authentication
    • Newsletter
      Newsletter
      • Subscribe
      • Archives
      • In Brief
    • Art Law Library
    • Movies
    • Nazi-looted Art Restitution Database
    • Global Network
      Global Network
      • Courses and Programs
      • Artists’ Assistance
      • Bar Associations
      • Legal Sources
      • Law Firms
      • Student Societies
      • Research Institutions
    • Additional resources
      Additional resources
      • The “Interview” Project
  • Events
    Events
    • Worldwide Calendar
    • Our Events
      Our Events
      • All Events
      • Annual Conferences
        Annual Conferences
        • 2025 Art Law Conference
        • 2024 Art Law Conference
        • 2023 Art Law Conference
        • 2022 Art Law Conference
        • 2015 Art Law Conference
  • Programs
    Programs
    • Visual Artists’ Legal Clinics
      Visual Artists’ Legal Clinics
      • Art & Copyright Law Clinic
      • Artist-Dealer Relationships Clinic
      • Artist Legacy and Estate Planning Clinic
      • Visual Artists’ Immigration Clinic
    • Summer School
      Summer School
      • 2026
      • 2025
    • Internship and Fellowship
    • Judith Bresler Fellowship
  • Case Law Database
Home image/svg+xml 2021 Timothée Giet Art law image/svg+xml 2021 Timothée Giet Protecting Chaco Culture National Historical Park: When Culture and Congress Clash
Back

Protecting Chaco Culture National Historical Park: When Culture and Congress Clash

November 3, 2022

By KimberMarie Faircloth

At the intersection of politics and culture there is usually a robust repelling force keeping the two from fully understanding one another. This force is made up of partisan policies, modern-day climate concerns, and economic issues all mingling with vestiges of history. On November 15, 2021, a long running conflict was brought to a head when a proposal for enacting a 20-year moratorium on oil and gas drilling around Chaco Culture National Historical Park (Chaco) was announced.[1] Advocates who have been working for such a ban for decades cheered while opponents grumbled. At the center of the issue is a cultural landmark with a birthdate of approximately 850 A.D., outlasting either side of the current debate.[2]

To understand the importance of such a proposal by the Biden Administration, the importance of Chaco must initially be understood. This article will briefly attempt to first explain the history and cultural significance of the historic park and then summarize the legislative build-up to the current moratorium as well as what it actually calls for. Finally, a short synopsis will be provided looking at the reasoning behind both the proponents and opponents of the drilling ban and buffer. From a birds-eye view, this is an attempt to better understand the various influences affecting policies which aim to protect the integrity of cultural heritage.

What is Chaco Culture National Historical Park and Why Does It Matter?

Chaco refers to a southwestern United States’ cultural complex containing over 4,000 archaeological sites on the Colorado plateau of the San Juan Basin in New Mexico.[3] It was designated as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO for its “monumental public and ceremonial buildings and architecture,”[4] the remarkability of which is due to the level of preservation maintained in such a climatically harsh geographic area as well as the level of craftsmanship by the creators.[5] These sites are associated with Paleo-Indian, ancestral Puebloans, Navajo, and Euro-American interactions and occupations.[6]

In 1907, Chaco became a national park after President Theodore Roosevelt signed the Antiquities Act of 1906.[7] In fact, it was Chaco that initiated the enactment of such legislation due to the damage being done to it at that time which alarmed archaeologists.[8] Such an enactment granted the park federal protection in preserving Chaco’s “extensive cultural system,” which included landscaping and architecture oriented “in accordance with solar, lunar, and cardinal directions potentially to capture the various solar and lunar cycles.”[9]

If one still wonders what exactly makes Chaco so important, beyond its historical and cultural significance mentioned previously, it remains a sacred site for Native Americans to this day.[10] The descendants of those who inhabited Chaco are the modern-day Hopi, Pueblo peoples of New Mexico, and the Navajo.[11] According to President of the Navajo Nation Russell Begaye, in a 2017 press release, “We are descendants from the Chaco Canyon area. We are connected to these lands spiritually. The voices of our ancestors live in this area and any disturbance to this area is culturally and morally insensitive.”[12]

What is the 20-year moratorium on oil and gas drilling around Chaco?

To understand the moratorium that has been proposed is to understand the years of advocacy and push-back that led up to its inception. In 2018, the former Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke delayed a lease proposal in an attempt to protect 4,000 acres of Chaco while requesting that more cultural research on the land take place.[13] Zinke’s efforts were made moot when the Trump Administration approved leases for drilling to take place on 2,300 oil and gas wells.[14] This action was subsequently followed by Congress enacting a moratorium for a one-year period on drilling.[15] Any further efforts by Congress to create a permanent barrier around Chaco via legislation failed, but hope was restored in the new Department of the Interior’s Secretary Deb Haaland and her position’s authority to create such a barrier granted by the 1976 Federal Land Planning and Management Act.[16]

Finally, at the White House Tribal Nations Summit of last year, President Biden and Secretary Haaland introduced the executive order that would, in theory, put into action the long sought after moratorium. The goal of the summit was to provide “an opportunity for the President and senior leaders from his administration to meet with tribal leaders and engage in Nation-to-Nation dialogue on critical issues in Indian Country.”[17] This executive order by President Biden would direct the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to begin protecting the federally owned lands within the 10-mile radius around Chaco from future oil and gas drilling.[18] The Biden Administration summarized the efforts to protect Chaco in the Summit’s Progress Report published by the White House:

“For the past decade, Pueblos and Tribes in Arizona and New Mexico have raised concerns about encroaching oil and gas development threatening sacred and cultural sites, and Congress has passed a series of actions to temporarily defer new leasing. In the coming weeks, the Department of the Interior will initiate consideration of a 20-year withdrawal of federal lands within a 10-mile radius around Chaco Culture National Historical Park, protecting the area from new federal oil and gas leasing and development. The proposed withdrawal will not apply to Individual Indian Allotments or to minerals within the area owned by private, state, and Tribal entities. The action will also not impose restrictions on other developments, such as roads, water lines, transmission lines, or buildings. To support conservation of the area, the State of New Mexico Land Office has implemented a moratorium on new state mineral leases within a 10-mile radius of Chaco Culture National Historical Park.”[19]

The proposal will be subject to a public comment period, environmental analysis, and formal tribal consultation during the first two years of the moratorium on creating new oil and gas drilling leases in the 10-mile buffer around Chaco.[20] This concern over protecting Chaco follows President Biden’s administration’s restoration and expansion of protections over other culturally important parks such as the Bears Ear National Monument and the Grand Staircase-Escalante, both of which are located in Utah.[21]

Who are the opposing teams in support of and opposing the ban?

For those in support of the moratorium, the cultural, historic, and environmental significance of preserving the park is obvious.[22] Fracking has been and continues to be a controversial method for extracting natural gas from the earth. In regards to Chaco, the main concern is that drilling could cause beyond-the-surface damage, destabilize underground structures, and potentially cause earthquakes underneath important Chaco architecture.[23]

Yet, for the opposing side, concerns of arbitrary political maneuvering and a lack of accurate tribal representation outweighs the need for such a buffer zone around Chaco.[24] In regards to the amount of land being protected in the buffer zone, Robert McEntyre, New Mexico’s Oil and Gas Association representative, questioned the “arbitrary limits on development in the region [which] will only disrupt the largest and most successful part of New Mexico’s economy.[25] Other concerns expressed by figures such as Bruce Westerman, a representative of Arizona, also focus on the economic impact of “[s]hutting down safe, reliable pipelines” and thus, “eliminating thousands of technical jobs and thwarting energy development at every turn…”[26]

Those somewhere in between supporting the proposal and opposing it question whether the ban itself will have any effect on actually protecting Chaco and if it is too late already.[27] “[I]n 2014, NASA satellites detected clouds of methane gas from thousands of leaking wells and pipelines” in the area along with approximately 30,000 inactive wells from drilling in the area that “will never be plugged and reclaimed.”[28]

Beyond just being concerned with the physical effect on Chaco, there is an equally, if not greater, alarming factor involved: lack of tribal representation and consultation.[29] The Navajo Nation ultimately withdrew their support of the proposed moratorium since it would also take away their agency to lease their lands as they see fit.[30] This is yet another move by the federal government, in a long line of moves regarding tribal lands, done without thorough consideration of tribal voices. A press release from the 24th Navajo Nation Council stated their position:

The Biden Administration bypassed previous requests to Congress for field hearings and for leaders to hear directly from our Navajo families affected in the Chaco Canyon region. The position of the Navajo National Council is for the creation of a 5-mile buffer within and around this sacred site. It is important that the federal government consider and work with our Navajo allottees to further advance development. The Administration must respect our tribal sovereignty and what the government to government relationship entails.[31]

Conclusion: is there a middle ground?

It is safe to say that no branch of government – nor person, ever – will create a law or policy that satisfies everyone. There is no political panacea. Yet, without such structures, a vital aspect of our democracy will crumble. It is a fact that Chaco Culture National Historical Park holds unparalleled cultural and historic value, not just for the United States but for global society as well. It is also true that sustaining economic opportunities for American citizens is important. Perhaps, then, the issue is not in choosing one over the other but in discerning the means by which we can achieve both ends. The means of which must include those directly involved and descending from Chaco ancestors: Tribal Nations. Voices of whom have been repeatedly ignored for centuries and could provide solutions that are able to strike a balance between economic and cultural priorities.

About the Author: KimberMarie Faircloth is a law student at Elon University School of Law and has a B.S. in Anthropology from the College of Charleston. KimberMarie interned for California Lawyers for the Arts this past summer, is currently a Staff Member for Vol. 16 of the Elon Law Review, and co-hosts Law School Crucible, a podcast for first-generation law students.

  1. Joshua Partlow & Darryl Fears, Biden proposes 20-year drilling ban around Chaco Culture National Historic Park, a sacred tribal site. The Washington Post. (Updated Nov. 15, 2021 at 2:59 p.m.) https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/11/15/chaco-canyon-drilling-biden/. ↑

  2. New Mexico: Chaco Culture National Historical Park, National Park Service (last updated Aug. 7, 2017). https://www.nps.gov/articles/chaco.htm. ↑

  3. Id. ↑
  4. “Chaco Culture,” UNESCO World Heritage Convention, https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/353/. ↑
  5. Id. ↑
  6. New Mexico: Chaco Culture National Historical Park, National Park Service (last updated Aug. 7, 2017). https://www.nps.gov/articles/chaco.htm. ↑
  7. Richard Moe, The Treasures of Chaco Canyon Are Threatened by Drilling, The New York Times (published Dec. 1, 2017) https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/opinion/chaco-canyon-new-mexico-drilling.html. ↑
  8. Id. ↑
  9. New Mexico: Chaco Culture National Historical Park, National Park Service (last updated Aug. 7, 2017). https://www.nps.gov/articles/chaco.htm. ↑
  10. Press Release: “OPVP Protect Chaco Canyon Region Through Collaboration with all Pueblo Council of Governors,” Office of the President and Vice President of the Navajo Nation. For immediate release (Feb. 24, 2017). http://www.navajo-nsn.gov/News%20Releases/OPVP/2017/Feb/OPVP%20PROTECT%20CHACO%20CANYON%20REGION%20THROUGH%20COLLABORATION%20WITH%20ALL%20PUEBLO%20COUNCIL%20OF%20GOVERNORS.pdf. ↑
  11. New Mexico: Chaco Culture National Historical Park, National Park Service (last updated Aug. 7, 2017). https://www.nps.gov/articles/chaco.htm. ↑
  12. Press Release: “OPVP Protect Chaco Canyon Region Through Collaboration with all Pueblo Council of Governors,” Office of the President and Vice President of the Navajo Nation. For immediate release (Feb. 24, 2017). http://www.navajo-nsn.gov/News%20Releases/OPVP/2017/Feb/OPVP%20PROTECT%20CHACO%20CANYON%20REGION%20THROUGH%20COLLABORATION%20WITH%20ALL%20PUEBLO%20COUNCIL%20OF%20GOVERNORS.pdf. ↑
  13. Joshua Partlow & Darryl Fears, Biden proposes 20-year drilling ban around Chaco Culture National Historic Park, a sacred tribal site. The Washington Post. (Updated Nov. 15, 2021 at 2:59 p.m.) https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/11/15/chaco-canyon-drilling-biden/. ↑
  14. Id. ↑
  15. Id. ↑
  16. Bruce Babbitt, Chaco Culture National Park is under siege, Writers on the Range (Published Sep. 27th, 2021) https://writersontherange.org/chaco-culture-national-park-is-under-siege/. ↑
  17. The White House Tribal Nations Summit Progress Report, Nov. 15-16, 2021. Prepared by The Domestic Policy Council. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/WH-Tribal-Nations-Summit-Progress-Report.pdf ↑
  18. Joshua Partlow & Darryl Fears, Biden proposes 20-year drilling ban around Chaco Culture National Historic Park, a sacred tribal site. The Washington Post. (Updated Nov. 15, 2021 at 2:59 p.m.) https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/11/15/chaco-canyon-drilling-biden/. ↑

  19. The White House Tribal Nations Summit Progress Report, Nov. 15-16, 2021. Prepared by The Domestic Policy Council. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/WH-Tribal-Nations-Summit-Progress-Report.pdf ↑

  20. Coral Davenport, Biden to Bar New Drilling Around a Major Native American Cultural Site, The New York Times, (published Nov. 15, 2021). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/15/climate/biden-bans-drilling-chaco-canyon.html ↑
  21. Id. ↑
  22. Bruce Babbitt, Chaco Culture National Park is under siege, Writers on the Range (Published Sep. 27th, 2021) https://writersontherange.org/chaco-culture-national-park-is-under-siege/ ↑
  23. Richard Moe, The Treasures of Chaco Canyon Are Threatened by Drilling, The New York Times (published Dec. 1, 2017). https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/opinion/chaco-canyon-new-mexico-drilling.html. ↑
  24. Coral Davenport, Biden to Bar New Drilling Around a Major Native American Cultural Site, The New York Times, (published Nov. 15, 2021). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/15/climate/biden-bans-drilling-chaco-canyon.html; “Navajo Nation Opposes Withdrawal for Development Chaco Canyon, Tribal Consultation Ignored.” The 24th Navajo Nation Council, Office of the Speaker. Press Release (Nov. 16, 2021). https://www.navajonationcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Chaco_Opposition_2021.11.16.pdf. ↑
  25. Joshua Partlow & Darryl Fears, Biden proposes 20-year drilling ban around Chaco Culture National Historic Park, a sacred tribal site. The Washington Post. (Updated Nov. 15, 2021 at 2:59 p.m.) https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/11/15/chaco-canyon-drilling-biden/. ↑
  26. Coral Davenport, Biden to Bar New Drilling Around a Major Native American Cultural Site, The New York Times, (published Nov. 15, 2021). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/15/climate/biden-bans-drilling-chaco-canyon.html ↑
  27. Mark Armao, In Chaco Canyon, a moratorium on oil and gas leases might be too little too late.” Grist (published Feb. 17, 2022). https://grist.org/indigenous/in-chaco-canyon-a-moratorium-on-oil-and-gas-leases-might-be-too-little-too-late/ ↑
  28. Bruce Babbitt, Chaco Culture National Park is under siege, Writers on the Range (Published Sep. 27th, 2021) https://writersontherange.org/chaco-culture-national-park-is-under-siege/ ↑
  29. “Navajo Nation Opposes Withdrawal for Development Chaco Canyon, Tribal Consultation Ignored.” The 24th Navajo Nation Council, Office of the Speaker. Press Release (Nov. 16, 2021). https://www.navajonationcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Chaco_Opposition_2021.11.16.pdf ↑
  30. Mark Armao, In Chaco Canyon, a moratorium on oil and gas leases might be too little too late.” Grist (published Feb. 17, 2022). https://grist.org/indigenous/in-chaco-canyon-a-moratorium-on-oil-and-gas-leases-might-be-too-little-too-late/ ↑
  31. “Navajo Nation Opposes Withdrawal for Development Chaco Canyon, Tribal Consultation Ignored.” The 24th Navajo Nation Council, Office of the Speaker. Press Release (Nov. 16, 2021). https://www.navajonationcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Chaco_Opposition_2021.11.16.pdf ↑

Disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes only and is not meant to provide legal advice. Readers should not construe or rely on any comment or statement in this article as legal advice. For legal advice, readers should seek a consultation with an attorney.

Post navigation

Previous Case Review: Art Works, Inc. v. Diana Al-Hadid
Next Case Review: US v. Philbrick (2022)

Related Posts

UPDATE: Warhol Foundation Wins $6.6 Million Insurance Payment After Six Years

June 30, 2013

Case Review: Schoeps v. Free State of Bavaria (June. 2014)

July 7, 2014

The “Artist Visa”: Immigration Law Primer and Artists’ Perspectives

December 16, 2019
Center for Art Law
Center for Art Law

Follow us on Instagram for the latest in Art Law!

Don't miss our on our upcoming Bootcamp on Februar Don't miss our on our upcoming Bootcamp on February 4th! Check out the full event description below:

Join the Center for Art Law for an in-person, full-day training aimed at preparing lawyers for working with art market participants and understanding their unique copyright law needs. The bootcamp will be led by veteran art law attorneys, Louise Carron, Barry Werbin, Carol J. Steinberg, Esq., Scott Sholder, Marc Misthal, specialists in copyright law.

This Bootcamp provides participants -- attorneys, law students, law graduates and legal professionals -- with foundational legal knowledge related to copyright law for art market clients. Through a combination of instructional presentations and mock consultations, participants will gain a solid foundation in copyright law and its specificities as applied to works of visual arts, such as the fair use doctrine and the use of generative artificial intelligence tools.

🎟️ Grab tickets using the link in our bio!
The expansion of the use of collaborations between The expansion of the use of collaborations between artists and major consumer corporations brings along a myriad of IP legal considerations. What was once seen in advertisement initiatives  has developed into the creation of "art objects," something that lives within a consumer object while retaining some portion of an artists work. 

🔗 Read more about this interesting interplay in Natalie Kawam Yang's published article, including a discussion on how the LOEWE x Ghibli Museum fits into this context, using the link in our bio.
We can't wait for you to join us on February 4th! We can't wait for you to join us on February 4th!  Check out the full event description below:

Join the Center for Art Law for an in-person, full-day training aimed at preparing lawyers for working with art market participants and understanding their unique copyright law needs. The bootcamp will be led by veteran art law attorneys, Louise Carron, Barry Werbin, Carol J. Steinberg, Esq., Scott Sholder, Marc Misthal, specialists in copyright law. 

This Bootcamp provides participants -- attorneys, law students, law graduates and legal professionals -- with foundational legal knowledge related to copyright law for art market clients. Through a combination of instructional presentations and mock consultations, participants will gain a solid foundation in copyright law and its specificities as applied to works of visual arts, such as the fair use doctrine and the use of generative artificial intelligence tools.

🎟️ Grab tickets using the link in our bio!
Don't forget to grab tickets to our upcoming Collo Don't forget to grab tickets to our upcoming Colloquium, discussing the effectiveness of no strike designations in Syria, on February 2nd. Check out the full event description below:

No strike designations for cultural heritage are one mechanism by which countries seek to uphold the requirements of the 1954 Hague Convention. As such, they are designed to be key instruments in protecting the listed sites from war crimes. Yet not all countries maintain such inventories of their own whether due to a lack of resources, political views about what should be represented, or the risk of misuse and abuse. This often places the onus on other governments to create lists about cultures other than their own during conflicts. Thus, there may be different lists compiled by different governments in a conflict, creating an unclear legal landscape for determining potential war crimes and raising significant questions about the effectiveness of no strikes as a protection mechanism. 

Michelle Fabiani will discuss current research seeking to empirically evaluate the effectiveness of no strike designations as a protection mechanism against war crimes in Syria. Using data on cultural heritage attacks from the height of the Syrian Conflict (2014-2017) compiled from open sources, a no strike list completed in approximately 2012, and measures of underlying risk, this research asks whether the designations served as a protective factor or a risk factor for a given site and the surrounding area. Results and implications for holding countries accountable for war crimes against cultural heritage are discussed. 

🎟️ Grab tickets using the link in our bio!

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #culturalheritage #lawyer #legalreserach #artlawyer
Don't miss our up coming in-person, full-day train Don't miss our up coming in-person, full-day training aimed at preparing lawyers for working with art market participants and understanding their unique copyright law needs. The bootcamp will be led by veteran art law attorneys, Louise Carron, Barry Werbin, Carol J. Steinberg, Esq., Scott Sholder, Marc Misthal, specialists in copyright law. 

This Bootcamp provides participants -- attorneys, law students, law graduates and legal professionals -- with foundational legal knowledge related to copyright law for art market clients. Through a combination of instructional presentations and mock consultations, participants will gain a solid foundation in copyright law and its specificities as applied to works of visual arts, such as the fair use doctrine and the use of generative artificial intelligence tools.

🎟️ Grab tickets using the link in our bio! 

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #legal #research #lawyer #artlawyer #bootcamp #copyright #CLE #trainingprogram
In order to fund acquisitions of contemporary art, In order to fund acquisitions of contemporary art, The Phillips Collection sold seven works of art from their collection at auction in November. The decision to deaccession three works in particular have led to turmoil within the museum's governing body. The works at the center of the controversy include Georgia O'Keefe's "Large Dark Red Leaves on White" (1972) which sold for $8 million, Arthur Dove's "Rose and Locust Stump" (1943), and "Clowns et pony" an 1883 drawing by Georges Seurat. Together, the three works raised $13 million. Three board members have resigned, while members of the Phillips family have publicly expressed concerns over the auctions. 

Those opposing the sales point out that the works in question were collected by the museum's founders, Duncan and Marjorie Phillips. While museums often deaccession works that are considered reiterative or lesser in comparison to others by the same artist, the works by O'Keefe, Dove, and Seurat are considered highly valuable, original works among the artist's respective oeuvres. 

The museum's director, Jonathan P. Binstock, has defended the sales, arguing that the process was thorough and reflects the majority interests of the collection's stewards. He believes that acquiring contemporary works will help the museum to evolve. Ultimately, the controversy highlights the difficulties of maintaining institutional collections amid conflicting perspectives.

🔗 Click the link in our bio to read more.
Make sure to check out our newest episode if you h Make sure to check out our newest episode if you haven’t yet!

Paris and Andrea get the change to speak with Patty Gerstenblith about how the role international courts, limits of accountability, and if law play to protect history in times of war.

🎙️ Click the link in our bio to listen anywhere you get your podcasts!
Alexander Butyagin, a Russian archaeologist, was a Alexander Butyagin, a Russian archaeologist, was arrested by Polish authorities in Warsaw. on December 4th. Butyagin is wanted by Ukraine for allegedly conducting illegal excavations of Myrmekion, an ancient city in Crimea. Located in present-day Crimea, Myrmekion was an Ancient Greek colony dating to the sixth century, BCE. 

According to Ukrainian officials, between 2014 and 2019 Butyagin destroyed parts of the Myrmekion archaeological site while serving as head of Ancient Archaeology of the Northern Black Sea region at St. Petersburg's Hermitage Museum. The resulting damages are estimated at $4.7 million. Notably, Russia's foreign ministry has denounced the arrest, describing Poland's cooperation with Ukraine's extradition order as "legal tyranny." Russia invaded and annexed Crimea in 2014.

🔗 Read more by clicking the link in our bio

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #artcrime #artlooting #ukraine #crimea
Join us on February 18th to learn about the proven Join us on February 18th to learn about the provenance and restitution of the Cranach painting at the North Carolina Museum of Art.

A beloved Cranach painting at the North Carolina Museum of Art was accused of being looted by the Nazis. Professor Deborah Gerhardt will describe the issues at stake and the evidentiary trail that led to an unusual model for resolving the dispute.

Grab your tickets today using the link in our bio!

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #legal #legalresearch #museumissues #artwork
“In the depth of winter, I finally learned that wi “In the depth of winter, I finally learned that within me there lay an invincible summer."
~ Albert Camus, "Return to Tipasa" (1952) 

Camus is on our reading list but for now, stay close to the ground to avoid the deorbit burn from the 2026 news and know that we all contain invincible summer. 

The Center for Art Law's January 2026 Newsletter is here—catch up on the latest in art law and start the year informed.
https://itsartlaw.org/newsletters/january-newsletter-which-way-is-up/ 

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #lawyer #artlawyer #legalresearch #legal #art #law #newsletter #january
Major corporations increasingly rely on original c Major corporations increasingly rely on original creative work to train AI models, often claiming a fair use defense. However, many have flagged this interpretation of copyright law as illegitimate and exploitative of artists. In July, the Senate Judiciary Committee on Crime and Counterterrorism addressed these issues in a hearing on copyright law and AI training. 

Read our recent article by Katelyn Wang to learn more about the connection between AI training, copyright protections, and national security. 

🔗 Click the link in our bio to read more!
Join the Center for Art Law for an in-person, all- Join the Center for Art Law for an in-person, all-day  CLE program to train lawyers to work with visual artists and their unique copyright needs. The bootcamp will be led by veteran art law attorneys specializing in copyright law.

This Bootcamp provides participants -- attorneys, law students, law graduates and legal professionals -- with foundational legal knowledge related to copyright law for art market clients. Through a combination of instructional presentations and mock consultations, participants will gain a solid foundation in copyright law and its specificities as applied to works of visual arts, such as the fair use doctrine and the use of generative artificial intelligence tools. 

🎟️ Grab tickets using the link in our bio!
  • About the Center
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Upcoming Events
  • Internship
  • Case Law Database
  • Log in
  • Become a Member
  • Donate
DISCLAIMER

Center for Art Law is a New York State non-profit fully qualified under provision 501(c)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code.

The Center does not provide legal representation. Information available on this website is
purely for educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice.

TERMS OF USE AND PRIVACY POLICY

Your use of the Site (as defined below) constitutes your consent to this Agreement. Please
read our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy carefully.

© 2026 Center for Art Law