Federal parks across the United States have become the latest battleground in a national debate over how the country tells its own story. In March 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing the Department of the Interior to ensure that all materials at national parks, monuments, and other federally managed sites do not contain content that "inappropriately disparages Americans past or living." The order, which was shared with the public through multiple outlets including The Associated Press and The New York Times, emphasized a new focus on "the greatness of the achievements and progress of the American people," as well as "the beauty, abundance, and grandeur of the American landscape."
The Department of the Interior, which oversees the National Park Service, responded by giving park employees until July 18, 2025, to flag any signage, exhibits, or materials that might be deemed inappropriate under the new directive. The public was also encouraged to participate, submitting feedback about displays or interpretive materials they felt did not align with the executive order's vision. According to The Associated Press, "as we carry out this directive, we’ll be evaluating all signage in the park along with the public feedback we’ve received," said Elizabeth Peace, spokesperson for the Interior Department. "This effort reinforces our commitment to telling the full and accurate story of our nation’s past."
Yet, the process has sparked controversy and concern among historians, park advocates, and civil rights groups. Critics argue that the order risks whitewashing or sanitizing the darker chapters of American history—such as slavery, the destruction of Native American cultures, and the environmental consequences of industrialization—by removing or altering educational materials that address these topics.
According to documents reviewed by The Associated Press and the National Parks Conservation Association, the administration set a deadline of September 17, 2025, to remove or cover up any materials not in compliance with the executive order. These would be reinstated only after being edited to meet the new standards. The review process has already flagged a wide range of materials across the country, each highlighting a different facet of America's complex past.
At North Carolina’s Cape Hatteras National Seashore, for instance, a sign titled "The Air We Breathe" was flagged because it discusses the importance of clean air and the dangers posed by pollution from human-caused ozone. The sign explains that power plants, cars, and industries burning fossil fuels are primary sources of this pollution, which threatens both human health and local vegetation. Another employee raised questions about signs addressing climate change and sea level rise, writing, "We do not believe it to be in violation, but would like someone to review if messaging of climate change and sea level rise reduces the focus on the grandeur, beauty and abundance."
Climate experts have pushed back against the idea of removing such information. Carlos Martinez, a climate scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists, told The Associated Press that national parks should be "places to learn about pollution, climate change and environmental degradation," and that eliminating these topics "limits the ability for our population, especially for the younger generation, to understand these issues that allow them to then take action."
Other flagged materials focus on the legacy of slavery and racism in the United States. At the Charles Pinckney National Historic Site in South Carolina, books for sale—including "Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl" by Harriet Jacobs—were marked for review. Similar books were flagged at the Washington Monument, where one volume discussed George Washington as a slave owner. In Pennsylvania’s Independence National Historical Park, exhibits describing the brutal realities of slavery—whipping, kidnapping, rape, and other violence inflicted on Black people—were also singled out. One exhibit about Black Americans escaping to freedom, which names slave owners, was identified for review as well.
For many, these materials are essential to an honest reckoning with the past. Cedric Haynes, vice president of policy and legislative affairs with the NAACP, emphasized to The Associated Press, "Slavery is not a side story. It’s the engine of American economic growth for more than two centuries. And there are individuals who played a part in this." Haynes argued that naming those responsible for slavery’s atrocities is crucial because "that legacy is embedded in American laws, institutions and the nation’s wealth."
Similar concerns have been raised about exhibits addressing the history of Native Americans. At Alaska's Sitka National Historical Park, an employee flagged a panel that discusses missionaries who sought to destroy the language and culture of Alaska Natives, and who forcibly removed them from their lands. The text in question reads, "The history of this land includes a series of actions that attempted to remove the Sheet’ka Kwaan from their land, culture, and language, which includes forced relocations under both Russian and American governance." In Florida’s Castillo de San Marcos National Monument, a panel discussing the imprisonment of Plains Indians was tagged for review, with an employee noting, "Text of panel needs review for language referring to tribes having a choice of extinction or assimilation. Language of U.S. Government giving the ‘choice’ of extinction could be considered negative towards the United States."
Experts in Native American history have voiced their dismay at the prospect of removing or rewriting such content. Jessica R. Cattelino, an American Indian studies professor at UCLA, told The Associated Press, "To cut off parts of those stories because they might make someone uncomfortable, that’s a disservice to the ecological and cultural value of these lands." Brenda Child, a Red Lake Ojibwe tribe member and professor at the University of Minnesota, noted that "it’s only been about two decades since we started telling the accurate history of the United States and Native Americans." She added, "You can try to suppress it, but the cat’s out of the bag. We know what happened. The books have been written."
Even the story of Florida’s Everglades National Park has not escaped scrutiny. Employees flagged interpretive materials that discuss the region’s history of urbanization, agriculture, and environmental degradation, suggesting these could be "conceived as being disparaging to the development of Industrial America." Yet, as Eve Samples, executive director of Friends of the Everglades, explained to The Associated Press, "If we don’t keep in clear view that history and the mistakes that we made in our past, then we are doomed to repeat them."
The debate has exposed deep divisions over how Americans remember their past and what should be emphasized in public spaces. While the Trump administration insists that the review will "restore truth and sanity to American history," critics worry that the process may erase the painful but essential lessons that history has to offer. Alan Spears, a senior director with the National Parks Conservation Association, summed up the concern: "Pretending that the bad stuff never happened is not going to make it go away. We need to be able to talk about these things if we’re going to have any hope of bringing people together."
As the September 17 deadline approaches, park visitors, historians, and advocates alike are watching closely to see which stories will remain on display—and which will be hidden from view. The outcome will shape not only what visitors learn at America’s most treasured sites, but also how the nation chooses to reckon with its own complicated legacy.
