The removal of the “Not One More Report” from the Department of Justice website raises significant questions about the treatment of missing and murdered Indigenous people (MMIP). This development highlights a critical disconnect between the federal government and tribal nations. The report, created through the testimony of tribal leaders and survivors, was designed to address a troubling crisis that has persisted for decades.
Federal scrutiny intensified after the report vanished under an executive order from the Trump administration, as part of a broader move to eliminate materials associated with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The administration has labeled the MMIP report as part of DEI-related material. Such a classification has prompted fierce backlash from lawmakers and advocacy groups, asserting that the issue of violence against Indigenous people is not framed by identity politics but is rooted in public safety and treaty obligations.
Senators who supported the legislation mandating the report have voiced their dismay. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto expressed disbelief that the administration would overlook the importance of this issue, stating, “They think they’re a race. They are ignorant to the fact of the trust and treaty obligation that we have to our tribal communities.” This sentiment reflects a larger misunderstanding within the government about the nature of tribal relations, which are grounded in legal agreements rather than racial classifications.
Another co-sponsor, Senator Lisa Murkowski, raised concerns over the consequences of ignorance in these matters. She emphasized that without acknowledgment of the problem, finding solutions becomes nearly impossible. Senator Tina Smith echoed this theme, calling the violence against Native people an epidemic and highlighting the need for recognition before any real progress can occur. This underscores the urgency of the issue and the impact of governmental decisions on already vulnerable communities.
Documents retrieved from archived web records show that the report was available on February 8, 2025, only to be removed the following day—aligning with a letter sent by tribal organizations requesting exemptions from the executive order. The timing underscores the controversy surrounding the decision to eliminate the document, which is now only accessible through third-party archives. This lack of visibility can hinder law enforcement and public awareness, particularly in rural areas with high rates of unresolved missing persons cases.
The data within the MMIP report is vital—it comprises extensive testimonies, statistics, and recommended policies. Removing it from federal platforms threatens efforts to understand and address the crisis. Furthermore, it is part of a troubling pattern where federal actions have alienated tribal communities, as seen in issues related to environmental protections and the mishandling of tribal contracts.
One example is the wrongful deportation attempt involving Leticia Jacobo, a member of the Arizona Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community. Her near-deportation underscored severe gaps in government awareness regarding tribal identity. Jacobo’s family had to rush to demonstrate her citizenship, revealing the complexities that federal agencies often overlook. As her sister stated, the confusion about how a Native American can face deportation reveals a deeper misunderstanding about tribal legal status.
The broader context of the missing report creates not only a policy gap but evokes a moral urgency. In 2022, the National Crime Information Center reported over 9,500 cases of missing American Indian and Alaska Native persons, with a significant percentage involving women. The MMIP report was intended to address these serious issues; its removal could undermine legislative efforts designed to confront the crisis head-on.
Senator Smith’s remarks highlight a crucial point: tribal nations possess a unique sovereign status, and misunderstanding this creates barriers to effective solutions. Her frustration illustrates how damaging it is when the administration appears indifferent to the roots of violence affecting Indigenous communities.
The reaction on social media has also signaled public frustration. Comments reflecting strong sentiments about Indigenous rights suggest that there is a growing awareness of how federal actions are perceived as erasing Native identities. These discussions highlight the broader societal implications behind such bureaucratic decisions. While some within the Trump administration argue for strict adherence to the executive order to prevent “unscientific frameworks” from emerging, critics point out the inherent risks of ignoring historical and legal contexts.
The DOJ maintains that the report’s removal aligns with their directive to eliminate DEI-related content. However, this approach threatens not only the report’s legitimacy but also the efficacy with which federal agencies can respond to MMIP issues. In the absence of federal support, tribal communities must rely on their own resources and advocacy to keep the crisis alive in public discourse.
This situation is not merely a bureaucratic oversight. It symbolizes a deeper rift between sovereign tribes and a federal government grappling with how best to acknowledge their existence and rights. The absence of the MMIP report from the DOJ website is more than a missing document—it reflects the ongoing struggle for recognition and justice faced by Indigenous communities.
"*" indicates required fields
