This legal framework has been criticized from multiple directions.

Scientists have argued that it allows reburial of scientifically invaluable remains based on tribal affiliations that cannot be scientifically verified.

Indigenous advocates have argued that it still places too much burden on tribes to prove affiliation and that it treats the ancestors of all Indigenous peoples as if their rightful custodians are determined by bureaucratic proximity rather than cultural connection.

The Buckeye Knoll case became a particularly vivid example of these tensions.