Trump Administration's Influence on Smithsonian Funding and Narrative

<p>Donald Trump has made several attempts to influence the Smithsonian Institution, including efforts to remove a museum director and install warning signs at the American History Museum. Recently, the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has utilized a funding mechanism to influence how the Smithsonian presents American history. According to public records, OMB included a footnote in two recent federal fund allocations that conditions nearly $190 million on the Smithsonian's compliance with Trump's March 2025 executive order, which accuses the institution of promoting 'divisive narratives.'</p><p>The footnote states that funds must be used in a manner consistent with Executive Order 14253, which aims to 'restore truth and sanity to American history.' This executive order initiated a campaign by the Trump administration to alter the Smithsonian's operations, alleging that it had adopted a 'divisive, race-centered ideology.' The footnote does not clarify how the Smithsonian should implement the order's vague restrictions. However, it is enforceable under the Antideficiency Act, which can impose criminal penalties for violations. This tactic is one of several used by the Trump administration to assert control over federal spending.</p><p>The Smithsonian is primarily funded by federal appropriations, receiving about $1 billion annually. Historical figures like John Quincy Adams expressed concerns about federal funding influencing the institution's independence. Despite facing challenges, the Trump administration has engaged in budgetary maneuvers to assert control over the Smithsonian, including requiring compliance with executive orders and altering funding requests.</p><p>While the impact of these footnotes on the Smithsonian's operations remains unclear, Democratic lawmakers have expressed concerns about the funding issues. Representative Chellie Pingree noted that the Smithsonian seemed hesitant to challenge the footnotes, which caused significant concern within the institution. Senator Jeff Merkley criticized the withholding of funds, stating that it was illegal to do so.</p><p>Experts have described the footnotes as unusual and potentially unlawful, with implications for the Smithsonian's autonomy. The Trump administration's budget request for 2027 proposes a reduction in funding, which raises further concerns about the institution's future. The White House has previously used similar tactics against other federal entities, and a recent court ruling deemed the use of restrictive footnotes to enforce compliance with executive orders unlawful.</p><p>The Smithsonian's leadership has defended its nonpartisan approach to history, amidst ongoing debates about how to narrate American history. The institution faces challenges as it navigates funding pressures and leadership changes, with concerns about the potential for increased political influence over its operations.</p>