Trump’s ‘warning’ signs outside the Smithsonian

Last week, US President Donald Trump ordered the installation of signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History, warning visitors that the museum does not accurately reflect American history and directing them towards material that does represent it truthfully: a dramatic escalation in his campaign to take control of how the nation’s history is told. The executive order, signed at the end of a week of heated congressional hearings on the museum, instructs the Secretary of the Interior, Doug Burgum, to install temporary signs along the pavements and footpaths managed by the National Park Service, which the public use to reach the museum. The signs will inform visitors of the White House’s criticisms, state that the museum’s exhibitions “should be revamped” and direct them “to places and resources where they can obtain accurate information about American history”. This move marks a new front in a 16-month campaign of pressure against the Smithsonian Institution, which has included reviews of the museum’s content, threats to funding and a successful attempt to oust a director. Now the White House is moving to disseminate an alternative government narrative outside one of the country’s most visited museums, an approach which, according to historians, is unprecedented.

Trump justified the order by citing the White House Domestic Policy Council’s 4 July report, “Saving America’s Story” (Saving America’s Story), which, he claimed, “demonstrates that the Smithsonian’s leadership does not present American history as a shared national heritage to be taught and celebrated, but rather regards it as a ‘primary tool’ for promoting ideas of social justice and the radical transformation of our society”. A joint statement from the White House went further, accusing the Smithsonian and its National Museum of American History of having shifted “towards extreme political activism, rooted in Marxism, to divide, demoralise and discourage Americans”. It stated that “Over the past decade, Americans have witnessed a concerted effort to rewrite American history and force our nation to adopt an ideology devoid of factual basis, aimed at discrediting American heroes and belittling American achievements”.

Trump also accused the museum of failing to pay proper tribute to the 56 signatories of the Declaration of Independence during the country’s 250th anniversary year, and ordered Burgum to install temporary exhibitions or information boards on National Park Service land that would “correct the inaccurate information presented in the museum”. The Smithsonian declined to comment. Its executives stated that the White House report misrepresents the reality of the museum and that they are committed to ensuring accuracy and impartial research.

The executive order drew immediate condemnation from the Democrats who oversee the institution. New Mexico MP Melanie Stansbury, the most senior Democrat on the House Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, described it as “one of the most stupid and bizarre executive orders we have ever read”. “This executive order represents a clear abuse of political power, driven by an ideological agenda aimed at rewriting American history,” Stansbury wrote on X. “Our Smithsonian institutions do not belong to the President, but to the American people, and so does the history of our nation.”

Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association, said that the plan to place government material outside the museum represented “an absolute affront to the professionals working in that building” and compared the signage to a sensitive content warning for visitors before they encounter exhibitions such as the one on the US national anthem. “There is no precedent for this,” said Weicksel. She pointed out that the Smithsonian has faced controversies over exhibitions in the past, the most famous of which concerned the display of the Enola Gay and the bombing of Japan, but added that the executive branch had never before sought “to present a completely alternative narrative” to that told within the national museum. The report and the order were based on “a very narrow and limited definition of patriotism”, added Weicksel, a definition at odds with that of the founding generation to which the administration refers. The nation’s founding fathers, he said, understood that “love for one’s country is linked to acknowledging the mistakes made and the areas where there is room for improvement”. His greatest concern, he said, was that the campaign could undermine public trust in an institution on which teachers and researchers have relied for over 150 years.

“Essentially, the White House is telling the American public not to trust the Smithsonian Institution,” he said. Conservatives who have long been pushing for change at the Smithsonian have welcomed the move, although some had hoped for more. Mike Gonzalez, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, who testified at both congressional hearings this week, said the provisions he most appreciated were those appointing administration officials – including the head of the Domestic Policy Council, Vince Haley – and instructing them to use “every available authority” to enforce the corrections. “If they manage to use this executive order to clean house and get rid of the leadership, that would be fantastic,” said Gonzalez, adding that, in his view, putting up the signs “is a smart move”. When asked whether he had consulted with the White House regarding the report or the executive order, Gonzalez replied that such discussions would be “private”. The order marks the latest chapter in a battle that has steadily intensified since Trump’s executive order of March 2025, which called for the removal of “inappropriate ideologies” from the Smithsonian. Since then, the White House has launched reviews of the content at several Smithsonian museums, criticised specific exhibitions and explanatory texts, and threatened to withhold already-approved funding should the institution fail to meet the requirements. As a public-private institution, the vast museum and research complex is historically independent, with a federal budget allocated by Congress. However, these funds are disbursed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, and the Administration has stated that all expenditure must comply with the President’s directives. Footnotes in the White House report indicate that the pressure will continue, promising a “future update” on the Smithsonian’s approach to diversity, equity and inclusion.

Jonathan Edwards

Copyright Washington Post