There seems to be a lack of consensus amongst ardent repatriationists over a measure aimed at immunizing art imported from abroad for purposes of museum exhibition from seizure. For example, while Rick St. Hilaire sees its merit, Tess Davis is dead set against it, claiming with little, if any, real analysis that the legislation will allow U.S. Museums to knowingly exhibit "stolen" art.
So who is correct here? The one who seems to believe the U.S. Government right or wrong or the one who seems to be with the source country right or wrong?
CPO is with St. Hilaire on this one; it seems like Ms. Davis relies on more than a few bogeymen to make her point. In fact, that seems to be an unfortunate hallmark of her otherwise excellent writing these days. Indeed, one really has to wonder whether she works at a foreign research center as is claimed or one specializing in anti-American repatriationist advocacy. If one has a legitimate claim here, why not make it in the country where the art resides before it is sent for exhibition in the US?
Update: Derek Fincham has also written a blog questioning Ms. Davis' and Mr. Masurovsky's provocative views. It can be accessed here.