HB3609, titled the “Remove the Stain Act,” would rescind every Medal of Honor awarded for actions at Wounded Knee Creek on December 29, 1890. The bill’s findings describe the Wounded Knee Massacre as the killing of hundreds of unarmed Lakota men, women, and children by the U.S. 7th Cavalry, and state that awarding the nation’s highest military honor for participation in that event undermines the integrity of the Medal of Honor and the Armed Forces.
The bill directs the Secretary concerned to remove the names of the affected recipients from the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard Medal of Honor Roll. It also specifies that recipients would not be required to return the medals and that the measure would not be construed to deny any federal benefit to any individual. The bill is framed as a symbolic correction to the historical record rather than a benefits-cutting measure.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would amend the federal treatment of the 20 Medals of Honor awarded for Wounded Knee by formally rescinding them and striking the recipients from the Medal of Honor Roll under title 10 of the U.S. Code. It would not require physical surrender of the medals and would not affect federal benefits, but it would change the official military honors record and the legal status of those awards.
Sentiment
No committee transcript or vote record is available, so there is no direct evidence of debate or roll-call support/opposition. Based on the bill text and its bipartisan-style introductory framing around historical accountability, the measure appears strongly motivated by support for Native American historical redress and criticism of the original awards. The absence of recorded votes or hearings means the broader legislative sentiment cannot yet be measured from the available materials.
Contention
The central point of contention is whether Congress should retroactively rescind military honors awarded more than a century ago for conduct at Wounded Knee. Supporters are likely to argue that the medals were issued for participation in a massacre of unarmed Native Americans and therefore dishonor the Medal of Honor itself, while opponents may view the bill as an improper revisiting of historical military awards or a challenge to settled military tradition. The bill’s findings emphasize tribal requests for revocation and the moral significance of correcting the record, suggesting the dispute is primarily about historical justice versus preserving existing honors.