In a move that has ignited fierce debate across the country, the Trump administration’s March 2025 executive order targeting so-called "improper ideology" at U.S. national parks and museums is now rippling through some of the nation’s most storied historical sites. According to reporting from The Washington Post, The Hill, and HuffPost, the Department of the Interior has been tasked with reviewing, and in some cases removing, exhibits, signs, and materials related to the history of slavery—including the famed Civil War photograph known as "The Scourged Back." The order and its implementation have drawn sharp criticism from historians, educators, and advocates who warn that the changes threaten to leave Americans with a sanitized, incomplete understanding of their own past.
The executive order, issued by President Donald Trump in March 2025, directs federal agencies to ensure that exhibits and interpretive materials in national parks and museums do not "inappropriately disparage Americans past or living." Instead, the order emphasizes the need to focus on the country’s "greatness" and "shared national values." The language is explicit in its intent: museums and historic sites should avoid "ideological indoctrination or divisive narratives that distort our shared history," according to the order, as cited by The Hill.
Implementation of the order began in earnest over the summer and intensified as autumn approached. As of September 16, 2025, more than 30 signs at Harpers Ferry National Historic Park in West Virginia—where abolitionist John Brown staged his famous anti-slavery revolt—have reportedly been removed or flagged for review. According to The Washington Post, these signs addressed racial discrimination and the mistreatment of formerly enslaved people by white Americans. Displays at the President’s House Site in Philadelphia, where George Washington housed enslaved individuals, have also been deemed out of compliance with the new federal directive.
Perhaps the most controversial change revolves around "The Scourged Back," an 1863 photograph that has become one of the defining images of the Civil War era. The photo, taken by McPherson and Oliver, depicts Peter Gordon, a formerly enslaved man who escaped a Louisiana plantation and joined the Union Army. His back, crisscrossed with scars from repeated whippings, shocked Northern audiences when it was first published in Harper’s Weekly on July 4, 1863. The image, as noted by the Smithsonian, "tells the story in a way that even Mrs. [Harriet Beecher] Stowe cannot approach, because it tells the story to the eye." For generations, it has served as "compelling visual proof of slavery’s brutality," and teachers have used it to help students grasp the realities of America’s past.
Initial reports from The Washington Post and HuffPost suggested that the Trump administration had ordered the removal of "The Scourged Back" from several park sites, including Georgia’s Fort Pulaski National Monument. The original photograph remains housed at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., and reproductions have been displayed at the National Portrait Gallery and other locations. According to HuffPost, the removal is part of a broader review that has also swept up books and educational materials about slavery. In South Carolina, for instance, a children’s picture book called "Shackles" by Marjory Wentworth—about her children finding shackles on Sullivan’s Island, a notorious entry point for enslaved Africans—has been flagged for possible removal.
The Department of the Interior has instructed both employees and park visitors to report any signs, exhibits, or gift shop items that may "focus too much on the negative aspects of American history." Rachel Pawlitz, a spokesperson for the National Park Service, explained to The Washington Post that "interpretative materials that disproportionately emphasize negative aspects of U.S. history or historical figures, without acknowledging broader context or national progress, can unintentionally distort understanding rather than enrich it." This view is echoed in the administration’s messaging, which frames the changes as a corrective to what it calls "corrosive ideology"—a term used in the executive order to label exhibits reflecting slavery or other brutalities as "inherently harmful and oppressive."
Yet, not everyone in the federal government seems to be on the same page. On September 16, 2025, Department of the Interior spokesperson Elizabeth Peace told The Hill that "NPS sites were not asked to remove the photo" of Peter Gordon. She added, "If any interpretive materials are found to have been removed or altered prematurely or in error, the Department will review the circumstances and take corrective action as appropriate." Peace emphasized that "our goal is accuracy and balance, not removal for its own sake, and we are committed to making corrections if mistakes occur."
Despite these assurances, the overall direction of the administration has alarmed many historians and advocates. Jonathan Zimmerman, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, told The Washington Post that the executive order "represents an enormous increase in federal power and control over the things we learn." He added pointedly, "Brought to you by the team that says education should be state and local." Alan Spears, a historian with the National Parks Conservation Association, was even more blunt in his assessment, telling South Carolina Public Radio, "Great countries don’t hide from their history. They learn from it and when necessary, they confront it."
Others argue that removing references to slavery from historic sites fundamentally distorts the American story. Edward Stierli, a senior regional director for the National Parks Conservation Association, told The Washington Post, "This is not just a handful of signs that tell the story of slavery. This is a place that tells the complete story not just of slavery in America, but what it was like for those who were enslaved by George Washington." Cindy MacLeod, another official, said the inclusion of information about Washington’s ownership of enslaved people is "vital" to the historical context of the site.
The controversy also highlights a broader debate about how the nation should confront its past. The Trump administration’s order is part of a wider push against diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in public institutions. Critics argue that such efforts are designed to "celebrate American history and ingenuity," as the order puts it, but risk erasing the hard truths that are essential to understanding the country’s ongoing struggles with race and inequality.
As of mid-September 2025, the Department of the Interior maintains that its goal is "accuracy and balance," not removal for removal’s sake. Still, the ongoing reviews—and the confusion over what has or hasn’t been taken down—have left many educators, historians, and park visitors uneasy. The fate of exhibits like "The Scourged Back" remains a flashpoint in the larger battle over how America tells its own story.
For now, the struggle over history’s place in the nation’s parks and museums continues, with each side convinced that the stakes could not be higher. Whether these changes will ultimately enrich or impoverish Americans’ understanding of their past is a question that, for now, remains unresolved.
