- Targeted stakeholdersFormally acknowledges historical injustice associated with the Wounded Knee Massacre.
- Targeted stakeholdersResponds to tribal resolutions and intertribal requests to revoke medals tied to that engagement.
- Targeted stakeholdersRemoves awards that supporters see as incompatible with the Medal of Honor's integrity.
Remove the Stain Act
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
This bill rescinds every Medal of Honor awarded for actions at Wounded Knee Creek on December 29, 1890, and directs the relevant Secretaries to remove those recipients' names from the official Medal of Honor Rolls.
It states rescission is symbolic only: recipients are not required to return physical medals, and the legislation does not strip any federal benefits.
The bill includes findings describing the Wounded Knee engagement as a massacre of largely unarmed Lakota men, women, and children and cites tribal and organizational requests to revoke those awards.
Symbolic, narrow remedy with low fiscal cost improves prospects, but political sensitivity about military honors and likely stakeholder opposition reduce odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill cleanly defines the problem and the substantive remedy (rescission of Medals of Honor for acts at Wounded Knee and removal from the Medal of Honor Roll). It specifies responsible actors and includes limited protective language (no return required; benefits unaffected), and it references existing statutory infrastructure (10 U.S.C. 1134a).
Progressives emphasize moral redress and tribal requests.
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
- Targeted stakeholdersCreates a precedent for retroactively revoking military honors, inviting future challenges to awards.
- Targeted stakeholdersMay be perceived as dishonoring descendants or unit histories tied to the original recipients.
- Targeted stakeholdersCould generate legal challenges about congressional authority to rescind awards and associated litigation costs.
Why the argument around this bill splits.
Progressives emphasize moral redress and tribal requests.
Likely broadly supportive; views the bill as a necessary symbolic correction honoring Native American pleas and restoring integrity to the Medal of Honor.
Sees rescission as acknowledgment of historical atrocity and a step toward reconciliation.
Cautiously receptive but cautious; recognizes moral basis for rescission while seeking clear legal process and minimized harm to families or current military morale.
Prefers procedural review and safeguards against broad precedent.
Likely opposed; views the bill as retroactively judging soldiers and diminishing military honors.
Concerned about politicizing historical events and undermining deference to military awards and personnel.
The path through Congress.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Symbolic, narrow remedy with low fiscal cost improves prospects, but political sensitivity about military honors and likely stakeholder opposition reduce odds.
- Level of support or opposition from veterans and military organizations
- Whether Armed Services Committee will prioritize and report the bill
Recent votes on the bill.
No vote history yet
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Go deeper than the headline read.
Progressives emphasize moral redress and tribal requests.
Symbolic, narrow remedy with low fiscal cost improves prospects, but political sensitivity about military honors and likely stakeholder opp…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill cleanly defines the problem and the substantive remedy (rescission of Medals of Honor for acts at Wounded Knee and removal from the Medal of Honor Roll). It specifies…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.