Museums will present their plans for showing artifacts and displays related to the Trump administration.
In a move that marks a first for American museums, the Trump administration is conducting a comprehensive review of exhibitions in several U.S. museums, including the Smithsonian Institution. The review, aimed at aligning museum content with the government's views, has sparked concerns among historians and museum professionals, with critics accusing the administration of curtailing artistic freedom and instigating a cultural war.
The review, which is in anticipation of the country's 250th anniversary next year, will affect museums such as the National Museum of American History, the National Museum of Natural History, the National Museum of African American History and Culture, the National Museum of the American Indian, the National Air and Space Museum, the Smithsonian American Art Museum, the National Portrait Gallery, and the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden.
The White House has instructed the Smithsonian Institution to carry out this review, following a decree issued by President Trump earlier this year, ordering museums to align their historical presentations with government views. The Republican claimed that there have been "concerted and widespread efforts to rewrite the history of our country and replace facts with a distorted narrative driven more by ideology than truth."
Trump stated that "the incomparable heritage of our nation, which drives freedom, individual rights, and human happiness, has been portrayed as racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed." The review aims to identify and remove unwanted portrayals of American history that are deemed "divisive or biased."
The review process includes scrutinizing exhibition texts, wall labels, websites, and educational materials to ensure they align with American ideals and maintain an appropriate tone. The review will assess the historical context and alignment with American ideals of the exhibition materials.
Critics emphasize that the Smithsonian is an independent institution governed by a Board of Regents, not directly controlled by the president. They warn that such interference threatens the integrity of public historical discourse. There is particular concern that federal funding could be used as leverage to enforce ideological conformity, as reflected in Trump’s funding cuts to certain educational institutions that do not align with his views.
Additional controversy arose in April 2025 when the National Museum of African American History and Culture announced returning some artifacts, which the museum says was part of routine loans rotation, but critics viewed this as potentially influenced by political pressure from the White House. The move and Trump's outspoken campaign against what he calls "woke" culture in museums have raised alarms about political interference in curatorial decisions.
This unprecedented level of government oversight in the nearly 250-year history of American museums has sparked fears among historians and museum professionals that it curtails artistic freedom and free expression. The current controversy involves former President Trump directing a comprehensive review and attempted control over exhibitions in several U.S. museums, including the Smithsonian Institution, accusing them of promoting "woke" ideology. Some museum documents must be submitted within 30 days.
[1] [News Article 1] [2] [News Article 2]
- The review initiated by the Trump administration, aiming to align museum content with government views, has led to a contentious discussion about policy-and-legislation and politics in war-and-conflicts, as historians and museum professionals voice concerns about potential curtailment of artistic freedom and free expression.
- As the White House instructs museums to align their historical presentations with government views, general-news outlets are closely monitoring developments, particularly the potential influence of policy-and-legislation on museum exhibitions, arts, and culture, as well as the implications for academic freedom and the integrity of public historical discourse.
