Washington D.C. – The Smithsonian Institution is navigating intense scrutiny from the Trump administration, which has ordered a comprehensive review of exhibits across eight of its museums to identify and remove what it terms “divisive narratives.” In response, Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III has informed staff that the institution is establishing an internal team to address the White House’s demands, while simultaneously asserting the paramount importance of its independence and commitment to rigorous scholarship.
White House Mandates Review of Smithsonian Exhibits
The directive, outlined in a letter sent to Secretary Bunch on August 12, 2025, by White House officials including Lindsey Halligan and Vince Haley, aims to align the Smithsonian’s programming with President Donald Trump’s directive to “celebrate American exceptionalism.” The administration’s review seeks to ensure exhibits do not contain “divisive or partisan narratives” and to “restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions” ahead of the nation’s 250th anniversary in 2026.
President Trump himself has been a vocal critic, publicly stating on his social media platform that the Smithsonian is “OUT OF CONTROL,” overly focused on “how bad Slavery was,” and that museums discuss “how horrible our Country is.” The White House subsequently released a list of specific exhibits and artworks it found objectionable, which included content related to race, slavery, immigration, and transgender identity. The administration’s push also follows an executive order signed in March 2025, titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” which accused the Smithsonian of promoting a “divisive, race-centered ideology.”
Smithsonian Secretary Affirms Institutional Independence
In a communication to Smithsonian staff, obtained by The Washington Post, Secretary Bunch acknowledged sensing President Trump’s “admiration and regard for the Smithsonian” during a recent meeting. However, he unequivocally stated, “Our independence is paramount.” Bunch emphasized that the institution is “grounded in rigorous scholarship and expertise, nonpartisanship, and accuracy.” The formation of an internal team signals a structured response to the White House’s request for information on the organization and its mission, while the secretary’s statements underscore a commitment to maintaining the integrity of its curatorial work.
Broad Criticism from Cultural and Academic Organizations
The administration’s broad review and demands have drawn sharp criticism from various cultural and academic bodies. The Organization of American Historians (OAH) expressed “deep concern and dismay,” labeling the White House’s request “unprecedented” and asserting that “no president has the legitimate authority to impose such a review.” PEN America, an organization dedicated to freedom of expression, also voiced alarm, characterizing the administration’s actions as “a betrayal of our democratic traditions and a deeply concerning effort to strip truth from the institutions that tell our national story.”
The Congressional Black Caucus criticized the administration’s focus on the Smithsonian, particularly the National Museum of African American History and Culture, as an attempt to “whitewash our nation’s history” and minimize the contributions of Black Americans while downplaying the obstacles they faced. Specific exhibits, such as a “Talking About Race” infographic from the National Museum of African American History and Culture that defined aspects of “whiteness,” and art pieces linking historical figures to slavery or addressing racial injustice, were cited by the administration as examples of “divisive narratives.”
The Broader Political Landscape and National Culture
This confrontation unfolds within a broader context of the Trump administration’s efforts to shape national narratives and exert influence over cultural and educational institutions. The timing, with the approach of the nation’s 250th anniversary, suggests a deliberate effort to present a particular vision of American history. The Smithsonian, as a major national cultural repository funded in part by Congress, finds itself at the center of this debate over historical interpretation, national identity, and the role of cultural institutions in a democratic society.
The Smithsonian has stated its commitment to “scholarly excellence, rigorous research, and the accurate, factual presentation of history” and has indicated it will “continue to collaborate constructively with the White House, Congress, and our governing Board of Regents.” The outcome of this review and the potential impact on future exhibitions remain a significant point of discussion, highlighting the ongoing tension between political influence and the pursuit of independent, evidence-based historical scholarship in the American culture and society.
