Republish
Bill to rename Hastings belongs back at the drawing board
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer āBy Author Name, CalMatters.ā If youāre republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use āBy Author Name, Special for CalMatters.ā
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the storyās text, include this copy: āThis story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.ā If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: āThis commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.ā If youāre republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, āyesterdayā can be changed to ālast week,ā and āAlameda Countyā to āAlameda County, Californiaā or āhere.ā
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: āAdditional reporting by [Your Publication]ā and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as āfor CalMattersā may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If youād like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if youāre interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? Weād love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
Bill to rename Hastings belongs back at the drawing board
Share this:
By Donald Craig Mitchell, Special to CalMatters
Donald Craig Mitchell is a graduate of Hastings College of the Law and an expert on federal Indian law.
In 1878, Serranus Hastings, the first chief justice of the California Supreme Court, gave the State of California $100,000 in gold to enable the University of California to start a law school. Since then, Hastings College of the Lawāthe alma mater of Vice President Kamala Harrisāhas been one of San Franciscoās most venerable institutions.
But on Aug. 31, the Legislature sent Gov. Gavin Newsom Assembly Bill 1936, which, if signed into law, will rename the school and disassociate Hastings from the institution he endowed. The reason is that, according to the bill, in 1859 Hastings āperpetrated genocidal actsā against Yuki Indians in the Eden and Round valleys north of Ukiah. That accusation is an unfair misrepresentation of the facts.
Hereās why:
In 2017, the San Francisco Chronicle published an op-ed in which John Briscoe, a San Francisco attorney and adjunct member of the Hastings faculty, reported that a UCLA professor had written a book in which he asserted that Hastings had been complicit in the killing of Yuki Indians.
After he read the commentary, Hastings College of the Law Dean David Faigman hired a Sacramento State University professor named Brendan Lindsay to advise the dean regarding what Hastings had done or not done.
An impartial finder of fact is an essential element of procedural due process. In 2012, Lindsay had written a book, āMurder State: Californiaās Native American Genocide,ā in which he accused Hastings of perpetrating āa massive genocide of āIndiansā during the second half of the 19th century.ā Having previously rendered that verdict, Lindsay was an inappropriate choice of an academic for Faigman to have hired to conduct an impartial review of the historical record.
That became apparent in 2018, when Lindsay delivered a āwhite paperā in which, as he had in his book, he announced that Hastings had been complicit in āgenocide.ā
But had he been? In 1860, the Legislature created a committee to investigate what had happened in the Eden and Round valleys the previous year. The historical record the committee compiled documents thatāwhile Hastings was a man of his time, no worse than others and better than manyāhis purchase of land in the Eden Valley and his efforts to dissuade the local Yuki Indians from killing his horses and running off his cattle were lawful under 1859 California law. When he was deposed, Hastings, who lived in Benicia, attested that until āthe investigations of this committee I was entirely ignorant of any outragesā that had been committed 176 miles north in the Eden and Round valleys.
Despite the condemnatory verdict Lindsay had rendered, Faigman did not advocate that the law school be renamed. Then, last October, The New York Times published an article featuring a photograph of the dean and reported that he had āled a campaign to keep the schoolās name.ā
Six days later, after an emergency was declared and a meeting was held with no public notice, the Hastings Board of Directors passed a motion that accused Hastings of promoting and funding āgenocide,ā and directed the dean to work with the Legislature āto enact legislation changing the name of the school.ā
In February, Faigman arranged for Assemblymember James Ramos (D-Rancho Cucamonga), chairman of the Assembly Select Committee on Native American Affairs, to introduce AB 1936. When the Assembly higher education and Senate education committees held hearings on the bill, no member of either committeeāDemocrat or Republicanācared to investigate the historical record in order to decide for him or herself whether Hastings had killed Indians or engaged in any other unlawful misconduct. Instead, if the Hastings Board of Directors said Hastings had promoted and funded genocide (because that is what Faigman had told the board because that is what Lindsay had told the dean), then he must have.
That is not how committees should conduct legislative business. Gov. Newsom should veto AB 1936 and tell the Assembly and Senate to start over. He should instruct the two committees to hold hearings during which the historical record is thoroughly, fairly and impartially vetted. After that, the chips can fall fairly where they may.
_____
Donald Craig Mitchell previously has written about the University of Californiaās tuition-waiver policy for Native Americans.