In a move that has ignited fierce debate across the United States, President Donald Trump and his administration have launched a sweeping review of Smithsonian museums, targeting exhibits that they claim portray American history through a divisive or ideological lens—particularly those addressing slavery, colonization, and marginalized communities. The controversy, which erupted in August 2025, has drawn condemnation from historians, educators, and civil rights leaders, who warn that efforts to censor or reshape Black history threaten not only historical truth but the very core of democratic discourse.
Over the past five years, the political climate around the teaching and presentation of Black history has grown increasingly fraught. According to recent reporting, legislators in at least forty-four states have introduced bans on teaching certain aspects of Black history, including the legacy of slavery. As one op-ed argued, acknowledging the horrors of slavery is vital for the nation to adopt a "never again" perspective. The article went so far as to call slavery America's "original sin," emphasizing that even some enslavers, like Thomas R. Dew, recognized the system's immorality—though often for self-serving reasons. "Forcibly taking millions of Africans from their homeland and condemning them to a lifetime of servitude isn't good, unless you're siding with the slave owners," the piece noted, underscoring the moral imperative to confront, rather than conceal, the realities of America's past.
The current flashpoint centers on the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, where President Trump has taken direct aim at the institution's portrayal of slavery. In a pointed Truth Social post on August 20, 2025, Trump accused the Smithsonian of being "OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been — Nothing about Success, nothing about Brightness, nothing about the Future." He went on to declare, "We are not going to allow this to happen, and I have instructed my attorneys to go through the Museums, and start the exact same process that has been done with Colleges and Universities where tremendous progress has been made."
These remarks came just as the White House announced an official review of eight Smithsonian museums, aiming to ensure that all exhibits align with the President's vision of "American exceptionalism" and eliminate what the administration perceives as "divisive or partisan narratives." Under the new directive, museums are required to alter any content deemed problematic in "tone, historical framing and alignment with American ideals" within 120 days.
But the Smithsonian, according to CNN, is not an executive branch agency and is instead governed by a 17-member Board of Regents led by Chief Justice John Roberts. This unique structure complicates the administration's ability to exert direct control over exhibits, raising legal and procedural questions about the scope of presidential authority in matters of historical curation.
The White House further escalated the issue on August 21 by releasing a list of 20 specific Smithsonian exhibits it alleges are framed through "ideological" narratives rather than factual evidence. Among the targeted displays: an exhibit at the National Museum of the American Latino that portrays the U.S. as "stolen land" rooted in colonization, a National Museum of American History display that highlights Benjamin Franklin as a slave owner and links his scientific achievements to the system of slavery, and an art piece depicting migrants watching July 4 fireworks through a border wall opening, which references the founders' fears of non-white immigration. The administration also took aim at the museum's LGBTQ+ History exhibit and a display celebrating the 50th anniversary of Title IX, particularly its focus on transgender athletes. Earlier in February, President Trump signed an executive order barring transgender athletes from competing in women's sports, a move that dovetails with the administration's broader cultural agenda.
Trump's criticism of the Smithsonian's portrayal of slavery and its impact on Black Americans has been met with a wave of backlash from academics and community leaders. Dr. Toni Draper, publisher of the Afro-American Newspaper, whose archives helped curate the museum, wrote in an op-ed, "Just as the Holocaust is remembered in all its brutality, so must America reckon with the truth of chattel slavery, Jim Crow and racial terror. Anything less is historical erasure, a rewriting of facts to make the nation appear more palatable." She continued, "But history is not meant to comfort — it is meant to confront. And only in confrontation do we find the lessons that lead us forward."
Presidential historian Douglas Brinkley echoed these sentiments in the New York Times, calling Trump's attacks "the epitome of dumbness to criticize the Smithsonian for dealing with the reality of slavery in America." Brinkley added, "It’s what led to our Civil War and is a defining aspect of our national history. And the Smithsonian deals in a robust way with what slavery was, but it also deals with human rights and civil rights in equal abundance."
Black historians and community leaders have been especially vocal. On August 23, Princeton's Eddie Glaude described Trump's efforts to remove exhibits on slavery as "an all-out assault on what made my mom and dad and their grandparents possible." Harvard professor Imani Perry went further, labeling the administration's actions as an attack on "deeply democratic knowledge" and "an attack on democracy itself." These critiques underscore the broader stakes of the debate: whether the country will allow political leaders to dictate the terms of its historical memory, or whether it will uphold the integrity of public institutions dedicated to truth-telling, no matter how uncomfortable.
The White House's list of "problematic" exhibits has also found support among conservative media outlets and think tanks. The Federalist recently published an article accusing the Smithsonian of "anti-American propaganda," while the Heritage Foundation has previously criticized the Latino exhibit as a "disgrace" to American history. The administration has vowed to work alongside the Smithsonian to review and, if necessary, revise the content of eight major museums, including the National Museum of American History, National Museum of Natural History, National Museum of African American History and Culture, National Museum of the American Indian, and others, to bring them into "alignment" with the president's historical vision.
Yet, as the debate rages, the underlying issues remain unresolved. For many, the attempt to sanitize or recast the nation's darkest chapters is not just a matter of historical interpretation but a fundamental threat to democratic values. The question now is whether America will choose to confront its past honestly or retreat into a more comfortable, but less truthful, narrative.
