Smithsonian Director Defends 1.7 Million-Object Museum at 2 GOP Hearings Over 'Political Activism'
Updated
Updated · The Atlantic · Jul 23
Smithsonian Director Defends 1.7 Million-Object Museum at 2 GOP Hearings Over 'Political Activism'
3 articles · Updated · The Atlantic · Jul 23
Summary
Anthea Hartig spent two days before House Republicans defending the National Museum of American History as a fact-based institution after a 162-page White House report accused it of “extreme political activism.”
Republicans turned the hearings into a loyalty test, repeatedly pressing Hartig on patriotism, a 2021 remark that “loving America is very complicated,” and past exhibits touching on transgender youth and slavery.
Hartig countered with specifics, saying the museum currently has 12 exhibitions covering the founding era, 368 objects, 340 labels and 54 mentions of George Washington, while arguing that telling the full story shows respect for Americans.
Democrats challenged errors in the White House report and defended Smithsonian independence, but Congress’ funding and oversight powers make the hearings the most public test yet of Trump allies’ push to reshape the institution’s historical narrative.
The clash echoes the Smithsonian’s 1990s Enola Gay fight, underscoring a recurring battle over whether national museums should commemorate patriotically or present fuller, more contested history.
Should a national museum prioritize inspiring patriotism or presenting a complete and complex account of the nation's past?
Who should decide what story a museum tells: historians who curate it or the officials who fund it?
Independence at Risk: How 2026 Political Attacks Threaten the Smithsonian and Public History
Overview
In July 2026, controversy erupted as the White House released a critical report accusing the National Museum of American History (NMAH) of extreme political activism. This sparked congressional hearings led by House Republicans, who echoed the report’s claims and targeted NMAH leadership, especially director Anthea Hartig. The Trump administration aimed to promote a more sanitized version of American history in federal institutions, while House Democrats defended the Smithsonian, calling the hearings an attack on independent scholarship. The dispute highlighted a deep divide over how American history should be presented and raised concerns about political influence over museum independence.