What the Anzick case contributed to this debate was a model, however imperfect, of how ancient genomic research and Indigenous participation could coexist in the same project.

That model has been influential even among those who consider it insufficient, because it demonstrated that the conversation was possible and that some productive outcomes could emerge from it.

Indigenous scholars working in this space have increasingly insisted on a different framing of the entire conversation — one that begins not from the question “what can ancient DNA tell us about Native American history?” but from the question “what do Native communities want from ancient genomic research, and under what conditions does such research serve their interests?” The shift from science as the subject and Native communities as objects of study, to Native communities as agents with their own questions and their own authority over their ancestors, is fundamental, and it has not yet been fully achieved in practice.

The Anzick child would not have had an opinion about any of this.