President Donald Trump’s latest executive order, titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” has triggered major controversy by targeting the Smithsonian Institution’s exhibitions. The directive demands that displays be scrubbed of so-called “improper ideology” and be kept “free from political or partisan influence.”
Central to this initiative is Lindsey Halligan, Trump’s personal attorney. As reported by CNN, Halligan has been tasked with deciding which exhibitions are ideologically unacceptable. When questioned about what would be considered as “improper ideology” , Halligan vaguely claimed in response that anything that is “weaponising history” and “overemphasising the negative” aspects of American History would be taken into consideration for it’s removal. She has accused the current displays at the Smithsonian of promoting a narrative that “demonises” American history and called for a rebalancing of how the past should be presented.
One of the exhibits reportedly under review is “The Shape of Power” at the Smithsonian American Art Museum. It frames race as a social construct which is an idea widely accepted in academic circles but is now being criticised by Trump allies as divisive. According to CNN, another point of contention is a past exhibit at the National Museum of African American History and Culture, which associated traits like “hard work” and “rational thinking” with white culture, a move Trump’s order refers to as “anti-American.”
Courtesy: Smithsonian Institution
Critics warn that this executive order threatens the very foundation of scholarly and curatorial independence. “This is a dangerous overreach,” said Representative Ayanna Pressley, as quoted by WJCT News, who is among a group of lawmakers pushing for an investigation into political interference at the Smithsonian. They argue that tying federal funding to ideological vetting compromises the institution’s credibility.
Despite being funded in part by Congress, the Smithsonian operates with a large degree of autonomy. Most of its exhibit funding comes from private sources, making the executive order’s reach less direct but still symbolically powerful. Historians and museum professionals fear this move as a part of a broader effort to whitewash U.S. history in favour of a sanitised and nationalistic narrative.
The Smithsonian Institution questioned Donald trump’s attempt at firing the director of National Portrait Gallery, Kim Sajet, calling her “highly partisan and a strong supporter of diversity initiatives.”
On June 10, the Smithsonian’s Board of Regents responded with a statement defending it’s independence. According to the CNN, the board, which includes Chief Justice John Roberts and Vice President J.D Vance said the institution “must remain free from political or partisan influence.” They reaffirmed that content decisions lie with the museum’s Secretary, not political appointees.
The Organisation of American Historians also criticised the executive order, warning that politicising history undermines public understanding and threatens the integrity of institutions tasked with preserving the nation’s complex and often uncomfortable truths.
Contributor
