The links between the Ancient One (Kennewick) case and the Kumarangk (Hindmarsh Island) case make for some sobering reflections on the politics of identity and the relationship between archaeological practice and related laws in the making of contemporary national identity in settler societies. The Ngarrindjeri Nation of South Australia and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) of the Columbia Plateau have recently worked together over international First Nation treaty development. It is tragic and ironic that major “heritage” controversies have arisen on the lands of these First Nations as a consequence of archaeological practice and have led through legal battles to the redefinition of Indigenous peoples in relation to the United States and Australian nation-states (see Hemming 2006; Watkins 2001, 2003). Both cases raise questions that seriously challenge the authenticity of settler colonial states. Importantly and sadly, Indigenous people have learned that legislation aimed at protecting heritage, such as the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act, 1984, also contain and restrict Indigenous sovereign rights. In an attempt to work beyond colonialist political and legal boundaries, the Ngarrindjeri, the CTUIR, and the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) are working toward strategic alliances between First Nations on the Pacific Rim.