The Smithsonian, an extensive institution comprising 21 museums dedicated to narrating the story of the United States and beyond, may face significant changes under the leadership of President Donald Trump. In a recent executive order, Trump expressed his intent to eliminate ideas from the Smithsonian that he believes “undermine the remarkable achievements of the United States.” This directive raises important questions about the future of this cherished institution, often referred to as “the nation’s attic,” which houses millions of historical artifacts.
Established by Congress in 1846, the Smithsonian was funded by a donation from James Smithson, a British scientist who intended for his estate to facilitate the “increase and diffusion of knowledge” in America. Interestingly, Smithson never set foot in the United States; however, his remains are interred at the Smithsonian Institution Building, commonly known as the Castle.
Currently, the Smithsonian is approximately 62 percent federally funded through a combination of congressional appropriations, federal grants, and contracts. The remaining funding comes from trust funds and non-federal sources, including donations, endowments, memberships, and revenue generated from various activities such as magazines, restaurants, and concessions. For the fiscal year 2024, the institution’s federal budget exceeds $1 billion.
The Smithsonian is not classified as a federal agency; rather, it operates as a “trust instrumentality” of the United States. It is entrusted with fulfilling the obligations established by Congress upon accepting Smithson’s donation. The institution is managed by a secretary, who is currently Lonnie G. Bunch III, appointed by the Board of Regents. This board comprises notable figures, including the chief justice, vice president, three members of the Senate, three members of the House, and nine citizens.
Describing itself as the “world’s largest museum, education, and research complex,” the Smithsonian encompasses 21 museums (with two currently in development), 14 education and research centers, and the National Zoo. It boasts an impressive collection, ranging from fighter jets suspended in the Udvar-Hazy Center to tiny specimens at the National Museum of Natural History. Over the years, the Smithsonian has evolved to present a diverse and inclusive narrative of American history, highlighted by the 2016 launch of the National Museum of African American History and Culture, which Trump specifically criticized in his executive order.
Historically, support for the Smithsonian has transcended political divides, with both conservative and liberal presidents championing the institution's autonomy. Samuel Redman, a history professor and director of the public history program at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, notes, “In an almost surprising fashion, the Smithsonian has been outside of the bounds of political wrangling.” While political influences have existed, funding and support for the Smithsonian have remained remarkably stable over time.
While it is rare for the government to censor content at the Smithsonian, there have been instances where exhibitions were altered due to political pressure. One notable case occurred in the 1990s when the National Air and Space Museum faced scrutiny over its plans to display the Enola Gay, the aircraft responsible for dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Although museum leaders intended to present a balanced historical account, critics perceived the exhibit as overly sympathetic to the Japanese perspective. Ultimately, the exhibition was canceled, leading to the resignation of the museum director, and the plane was displayed without any interpretative context.
Another significant incident took place in 2010 when then-Smithsonian Secretary Wayne Clough ordered the removal of a film by David Wojnarowicz from a National Portrait Gallery exhibition focused on LGBTQ artists. The film, which depicted ants crawling on a crucifix, drew backlash from conservative lawmakers and was ultimately removed from the exhibition.
While such instances of censorship are relatively uncommon, Redman expresses concern regarding the language in Trump's executive order, which suggests a singular interpretation of American history. He emphasizes the importance of embracing the multitude of perspectives that shape the American narrative, advocating for a story that deserves reflection rather than a singular celebration.
