The Smithsonian Institution, the country’s iconic museum complex and a pillar of American cultural life, is facing mounting pressure from the White House over a sweeping content review ordered by President Trump. The standoff, which has unfolded over the past few months, has now reached a critical point, with the administration threatening to withhold federal funding if the Smithsonian does not comply with a raft of new documentation demands.
On December 18, 2025, the White House delivered a stern letter to Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie Bunch, making clear that continued funding for the museums is now tied to adherence to Trump’s executive order and the completion of the administration’s review process. According to The Washington Post and CNN, the letter—signed by Domestic Policy Council Director Vince Haley and White House budget director Russell Vought—noted that the Smithsonian’s earlier submissions “fell far short of what was requested, and the overwhelming majority of requested items remain outstanding.”
This dispute traces its roots back to August 2025, when the Trump administration launched a far-reaching review of eight Smithsonian museums. The stated goal: to ensure that the museums’ content and programming are in alignment with President Trump’s executive order issued in March, which calls for the celebration of “American exceptionalism,” the removal of “divisive or partisan narratives,” and the restoration of “confidence in our shared cultural institutions.” The executive order, numbered 14253 and titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” has become a touchstone for the administration’s approach to cultural policy.
In the August request, White House officials sought a broad array of materials from the Smithsonian, including gallery labels, future exhibition plans, internal communications about artwork selection, organizational charts, curatorial manuals, and detailed proposals for programming—especially those related to the upcoming 250th anniversary of the United States. According to CNN, the administration’s ask was unprecedented in its scope, and the White House has made clear that federal funds are “only available for use in a manner consistent with Executive Order 14253.”
The Smithsonian, which has operated as a unique public-private trust for 179 years, receives about two-thirds of its budget from the federal government. This reliance on public funding has left the institution in a precarious position, as the Trump administration has shown a willingness to use budgetary leverage to enforce its cultural agenda. “The American people will have no patience for any museum that is diffident about America’s founding or otherwise uncomfortable conveying a positive view of American history, one which is justifiably proud of our country’s accomplishments and record,” the White House officials wrote in their December 18 letter.
The initial deadline for the Smithsonian’s document submission was September 11, 2025. However, the White House extended the deadline “in recognition of ongoing staffing transitions at the Smithsonian.” Despite this concession, officials said that no material had been provided since September 18, and “much remains outstanding.” The administration has now set a new deadline: January 13, 2026. If the Smithsonian fails to submit the remaining documents—including those relating to its organizational structure and plans for the nation’s semiquincentennial—the threat of funding cuts looms large.
Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie Bunch responded on December 19, 2025, with a letter obtained by The Washington Post, emphasizing the institution’s “commitment to sharing information and data.” Bunch explained that a recent 43-day government shutdown had delayed the requested work and asked the White House to “please understand that this work has been time consuming, involving many staff and departments throughout the Smithsonian.” He added, “I would be pleased to meet and share an update on our internal efforts to review and update our content.”
In a message sent to Smithsonian staff that same evening, Bunch reiterated that the museum intended to submit more information to the White House that day. He also made clear where the institution draws the line: “All content, programming, and curatorial decisions are made by the Smithsonian.” According to The Hill, Bunch’s stance reflects a desire to balance transparency and cooperation with the museum’s longstanding commitment to curatorial independence.
The tensions between the White House and the Smithsonian have been simmering for months. President Trump, in comments reported by CNN, has accused the museum complex of being “out of control,” claiming that “everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been.” These remarks have fueled concerns among museum professionals and historians that the administration’s review is less about transparency and more about imposing a particular ideological narrative on the nation’s cultural institutions.
Experts in museum ethics have weighed in on the situation, warning that the demands set by the Trump administration are nearly impossible to meet within the given timeframe. Janet Marstine, a noted scholar in the field, told CNN that the White House’s requirements “set the Smithsonian up for failure.” She explained, “Nobody could provide those kinds of materials in such a comprehensive way, in that short amount of time, and so it’s just an impossible task.”
Behind the scenes, Smithsonian staff have been scrambling to respond to the administration’s requests. As Bunch noted in his communications, the process of reviewing and updating museum content is inherently complex, often taking years of careful planning, scholarly input, and curatorial review. The Smithsonian’s exhibits, ranging from the National Museum of American History to the National Air and Space Museum, are shaped by teams of experts who evaluate historical accuracy, public engagement, and educational value.
The broader context of this standoff is a political climate in which cultural institutions have become battlegrounds for debates over national identity and historical memory. The Trump administration’s use of executive orders and budgetary power to influence museum content is part of a larger pattern that has seen similar interventions in education, the arts, and public broadcasting. For the Smithsonian, the stakes are especially high: as the steward of the nation’s most visited museums, its ability to maintain independence is seen by many as a test of American cultural pluralism.
As the January 13 deadline approaches, all eyes are on the Smithsonian and the White House. Will the museum be able to satisfy the administration’s demands without compromising its curatorial principles? Or will the threat of funding cuts force a change in course? The answer, it seems, will have lasting implications not just for the Smithsonian, but for the future of American cultural institutions more broadly.
For now, Secretary Bunch and his team are walking a tightrope—balancing the need for federal support with the imperative to preserve the Smithsonian’s independence. As Bunch put it, the institution remains “committed to sharing information and data,” but the final say on content and programming, he insists, “are made by the Smithsonian.”
With the nation’s 250th anniversary on the horizon and the debate over America’s story heating up, the Smithsonian’s next move will be watched closely by historians, policymakers, and the public alike. What’s at stake isn’t just funding, but the very way America understands its past and imagines its future.