Trump admin orders Smithsonian museums to be reviewed for ‘Americanism'
In a letter sent on Tuesday to Smithsonian Institution Secretary Lonnie Bunch III, the White House laid out in detail the steps it expects the organisation to take so that museum content can be reviewed for a focus on 'Americanism'.
The federal government will review public-facing museum content, such as social media, exhibition text and educational materials, to 'assess tone, historical framing, and alignment with American ideals', the letter said.
'This initiative aims to ensure alignment with the President's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions,' the letter added.
In a statement responding to the letter, the Smithsonian said it remained committed to 'scholarly excellence, rigorous research, and the accurate, factual presentation of history'.
'We are reviewing the letter with this commitment in mind and will continue to collaborate constructively with the White House, Congress, and our governing Board of Regents,' it said.
The White House said that the review is in line with the Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History Executive Order, which Trump signed in March.
At the time, the Congressional Black Caucus, made up of Black members of the US Congress, described the Trump administration's efforts to restrict the Smithsonian Institution as 'whitewashing our nation's history'.
'Donald Trump's idea that the National Museum of African American History and Culture is guilty of distorting our nation's history or painting our 'founding principles' in a 'negative light' is patently ridiculous,' the caucus said in a statement.
'Let's be clear, Black history is American history. Any rhetoric that opposes this notion is not only factually incorrect but blatantly racist,' the caucus said.
'It is the Trump Administration that bans books, words, and phrases that do not fit their narrative. It is the Trump Administration that wants to erase and retell our history,' the caucus added.
The White House said the review would initially focus on the National Museum of American History, the National Museum of Natural History, the National Museum of African American History and Culture, the National Museum of the American Indian, the National Air and Space Museum, the Smithsonian American Art Museum, the National Portrait Gallery and the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden.
The museums under review are all located in Washington, DC, where the president this week ordered the deployment of the US National Guard to tackle a purported crime wave that city officials in the capital have refuted.
The museums all offer free admission and attract millions of visitors each year, with the National Museum of American History alone recording 2 million in-person visits in 2024.
The Smithsonian has repeatedly denied allegations that it has changed or removed exhibit details in response to pressure from the Trump administration. Recently, the institution removed references to Trump's two impeachments from an exhibit on the US presidency. The Smithsonian Institution said that a placard was removed for reasons related to consistency and because it 'blocked the view of the objects inside its case'.
'We were not asked by any Administration or other government officials to remove content from the exhibit,' the Institution said.
The Smithsonian Institution, which runs 21 museums and the National Zoo, said at the time that the impeachment section of the museum would be updated in the coming weeks to 'reflect all impeachment proceedings in our nation's history'.
Trump was impeached in January 2021, for 'incitement of insurrection', after a mob of his supporters stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Why has the US issued a ‘terrorism' travel alert for Mexico?
The US State Department has issued an updated travel warning for Americans visiting Mexico, citing risks of 'terrorism, crime, and kidnapping'. The move follows months of intense pressure from President Donald Trump over issues such as immigration and the activities of criminal gangs involved in drug smuggling and human trafficking. Here is what we know: What happened? On Tuesday, the United States government issued a new travel alert for Mexico, warning of 'terrorist' violence in 30 of its 32 states. It's the first time Washington has ever sounded the alarm on Mexico for terrorism risk. The advisory paints a grim picture: soaring rates of homicide, kidnapping, carjacking and robbery, alongside a new warning of possible terrorist attacks and terrorist violence. 'There is a risk of terrorist violence, including attacks and related activities,' it warned, urging Americans to take precautions. The travel alert was raised to Level 2 – 'exercise increased caution' on a scale of four levels. Which places did the US warn about and why? The alert warns Americans not to travel to Colima, Guerrero, Michoacan, Sinaloa, Tamaulipas, and Zacatecas provinces due to 'terrorism, violent crime, and kidnapping.' These states are marked red on the map and classified as Level 4 — the most unsafe, per the US. Travellers are advised to reconsider visiting Baja California, Chiapas, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Guanajuato, Jalisco, Morelos, and Sonora for the same reasons; these appear in orange and are rated Level 3, or marginally safer. Another 16 states – including Mexico City, the State of Mexico, Quintana Roo, Oaxaca, Tabasco, Morelos, Aguascalientes, Baja California Sur, Durango, Hidalgo, Nayarit, Nuevo Leon, Puebla, Queretaro, San Luis Potosi, Tlaxcala, and Veracruz – fall under 'exercise increased caution'. While there are no outright travel bans, the advisory notes that both violent and non-violent crimes are common. These areas are shown in yellow and are listed under Level 2. Only Yucatan and Campeche remain at Level 1, the lowest risk level, highlighted in blue. What is the backdrop for this advisory? According to experts, these actions follow increased pressure from Trump, which has prompted the Mexican government to take a range of measures. Earlier this week, Mexico extradited 26 alleged cartel members to the US, in what appeared to be an effort to ease Trump's demands for stronger action against fentanyl smuggling and organised crime. In a statement, the US embassy said those extradited included key figures from the Jalisco New Generation Cartel and the Sinaloa Cartel, Mexico's two most powerful organised crime groups. We recognize @GabSeguridadMX for its dedication and commitment. This action reflects the strength of our bilateral cooperation as sovereign partners and our shared commitment to ensure our people's security and well being. — Embajador Ronald Johnson (@USAmbMex) August 13, 2025 This marks the second mass transfer of the year; in February, Mexican authorities sent 29 alleged cartel leaders to the US, a move that stirred debate over its political and legal merits. Among them was Caro Quintero, a founding member of the Guadalajara Cartel, accused of murdering DEA agent Enrique 'Kiki' Camarena in 1985. US officials had requested the extraditions, pledging not to seek the death penalty. Mexico described the suspects as high-risk criminals tied to drug trafficking and other serious offences. While extraditions are not uncommon, they are typically carried out in ones and twos. But this year alone, Mexico has already handed over 55 people. The transfers follow months of US pressure, reinforced by tariff threats, and reports that Trump directed the Pentagon to consider military action against Latin American cartels. According to those reports, the order would permit direct military operations on foreign soil and in corresponding territorial waters against organised criminal groups. Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum has said the US and Mexico are close to finalising a security agreement to boost cooperation against cartels, but she has firmly rejected the idea of unilateral US military operations on Mexican soil. How has Mexico responded to the new alert? Sheinbaum downplayed the updated travel advisory. She argued the change stems from Washington's decision to label cartels as terrorist organisations – done through an executive order earlier this year – rather than from any new security reality. Sheinbaum stressed that Mexico remains the top destination for US travellers, with about a million Americans living in the country, and noted that popular areas such as the Southeast, Baja California Peninsula, Pacific coast, and Mexico City continue to attract visitors despite the warning. How bad is Mexico's violence problem? Bad, but it's improving. According to a 2024 report from Human Rights Watch, violent crime in Mexico has risen sharply since the government began its 'war' on organised crime in 2006. However, this year, Sheinbaum can report a 25.3 percent drop in daily homicides over her first 11 months in office, from 86.9 per day in September 2023 to 64.9 now – the lowest monthly figures since 2015. While Mexico remains one of the world's most violent countries, the decline is seen as a significant improvement, credited to her administration's security strategy, but also US pressure. When Trump took office, he quickly warned Mexico that it had to show real progress in stopping the flow of fentanyl, a drug that has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, or face steep trade tariffs. He promised to push Mexico harder to curb drug trafficking and illegal migration, making it clear there would be serious economic consequences if it didn't act. In Sheinbaum's first year in office, authorities have seized more than 3.5 million fentanyl pills and arrested at least 29,000 suspects, including high-level cartel leaders with local and national reach. Security chief Omar Garcia Harfuch credited the success to the crucial work of specialised intelligence and investigative units. However, in places like Sinaloa, the bloodshed escalated sharply after the arrests of major figures, including Ismael Zambada, the leader of the Sinaloa cartel, in August 2024. During the first six months of this year, authorities recorded 883 homicides in the state, up from just 224 in the same period last year, with most killings concentrated in Culiacan. The violence may be only part of the toll. Since Zambada's arrest, more than 1,500 people have gone missing in Sinaloa. Security officials believe criminal groups are behind many of these disappearances, suggesting the real cost of the crackdown could be even higher. Zambada, one of Mexico's most notorious accused drug lords, was captured at an airfield near El Paso, Texas, alongside Ovidio Guzman, a son of Joaquin 'El Chapo' Guzman – the former leader of the Sinaloa Cartel who is serving a life sentence in a US prison. Zambada claims Guzman Lopez kidnapped him and handed him over to US authorities.
Al Jazeera
4 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Russia pounds Ukraine, boosts army as world braces for Putin-Trump talks
Russian President Vladimir Putin's announcement that he would meet with his United States counterpart in Alaska to discuss a settlement in Ukraine triggered a diplomatic flurry between Ukraine and its European allies – all of whom have been left out of the discussion. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has warned that Putin is not earnest about peace as the Russian army continues to pound away at Ukraine. 'There is no indication whatsoever that the Russians have received signals to prepare for a post-war situation,' Zelenskyy said, citing recent intelligence, in his Monday evening address to the Ukrainian people. 'On the contrary, they are redeploying their troops and forces in ways that suggest preparations for new offensive operations.' European leaders have also warned US President Donald Trump against trading away Ukrainian land. 'Until Russia agrees to a full and unconditional ceasefire, we should not even discuss any concessions,' said Kaja Kallas, the European Union's foreign policy chief. On Wednesday, EU states forming the Coalition of the Willing, a military grouping including some of Europe's largest militaries, warned that 'international borders must not be changed by force' and that if Russia did not agree to an immediate ceasefire, more economic sanctions should be imposed on Moscow. Putin and Trump will talk one-on-one first, with only translators present, before participating in meetings with delegates, a Russian official said on Thursday, adding that there will be a joint news conference later on in the day. As Russia confirmed the Alaska meeting, its army pounded away at Ukraine, seizing the village of Yablunivka in the eastern Donetsk region on Saturday. Some 535 Russian drones and missiles rained on Ukraine during the week of August 7-13. Ukraine intercepted just under two-thirds of them; and Moscow's forces launched eight missiles against Ukraine, five of which got through its defences. The Alaska summit Putin aide Yuri Ushakov announced the Alaska summit on August 7, a day after Putin met with Trump envoy Steve Witkoff and suggested it. The statement led to immediate confusion within the Trump White House. An unnamed administration official denied it, saying a Putin-Zelenskyy meeting would have to happen first. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio seemed to agree, telling the Fox entertainment network, 'Obviously, the Ukrainians have a right to be part of this process. We have to find a compromise between both sides so that the chief mediator, President Trump, can step in and make it happen.' But on Monday, Trump said that Zelenskyy was not invited to Alaska. Nor were Ukraine's European allies. Trump has stoked fears before among Ukrainian and European officials that he would elbow them aside to partition Ukraine in a great power deal with Russia. During Monday's news conference, Trump offered conflicting information about whether that was still his intention, on the one hand saying, 'I am going to call up President Zelenskyy and the European leaders, right after the meeting, and tell them what kind of a deal…,' then interrupting himself and saying, 'I'm not going to make a deal. It's not up to me to make a deal'. Both Trump and Rubio intimated that Putin had shared with them his red lines. 'I think for maybe the first time since this administration began, we have concrete examples of what Russia might require to end the war,' Rubio said, without giving details of the Kremlin's demands. 'There will be some land swapping going on,' Trump said. 'I know that through Russia and through conversations with everybody.' Zelenskyy publicly pitted himself against the Alaska summit. In July alone, he said, Russia dropped more than 5,100 guided aerial bombs, more than 3,800 drones and nearly 260 missiles on Ukraine. Ukrainian Commander in Chief Oleksandr Syrskii said that during July, Russian forces 'tried to advance along almost the entire line of contact'. He also revealed that the Russian armed forces were managing to out-recruit their losses. Despite sustaining heavy losses of 33,000 troops last month, Syrskii said, 'The enemy is increasing its grouping by 9,000 people every month.' Russia plans to form 10 new divisions by the end of the year, two of which have already been created, said Syrskii. 'Therefore,' he concluded, 'we have no choice but to continue mobilisation measures, improve combat training, and strengthen the drone component of our troops'. What's Putin's game? Zelenskyy on Saturday said that Putin wanted the part of the Donetsk region that Russia does not occupy, in addition to keeping the Luhansk region. Bloomberg on Friday cited unnamed sources as confirming that Russia had made this demand for Ukraine's east. 'He was allowed to take Crimea, and this led to the occupation of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions,' Zelenskyy said on Saturday, referring to Russia's annexation of Crimea in January 2014, and his open support for pro-Moscow separatists in Ukraine's east. 'We will not allow this second attempt to partition Ukraine.' Russia claims all of Luhansk and Donetsk, as well as the Zaporizhia and Kherson regions, but only controls Luhansk. Roughly a quarter of the other three regions remain in Kyiv's hands. The free portion of Donetsk is particularly important, said the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, because it contains a 50km (30-miles) long 'fortress belt' of heavily fortified cities: Sloviansk, Kramatorsk, Druzhivka and Konstyantynivka. Seizing them would be a 'multi-year effort', the ISW said, because Ukraine had been investing in their defence since recapturing them from Russian control in 2014. Similarly, the city of Zaporizhzhia, which lies in the unoccupied portion of the region, has been heavily fortified, and the unoccupied part of Kherson is separated from the Russian front line by the wide Dnipro river, the ISW said. Ceding all these territories to Russia would weaken Ukraine's ability to defend its remaining areas, the ISW said. 'Potential Ukrainian defensive lines in this area would run through open fields, and natural obstacles such as the Oskil and Siverskyi Donets rivers are too far east to serve as defensive positions,' it said. On Saturday, Ukraine and the EU presented a plan to US officials outlining mutual territorial concessions and NATO membership for what remained of Ukraine, the Wall Street Journal reported. Ukraine's deep strikes Putin has in the past suggested a partial ceasefire on deep strikes, while preserving front-line hostilities. Some observers have suggested that this would suit Russia because Ukraine has been successful at interdicting its supply lines and wearing down its defence industrial base and energy infrastructure. On Saturday, Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) said a long-range strike set fire to a Russian drone warehouse in the Republic of Tatarstan, where Russia has built a large factory producing Iranian-designed Shahed drones. Ukraine's military intelligence agency also said that sabotage operations had caused explosions at a Russian anti-aircraft missile base in Afipsky, in the Krasnodar Krai border region. Ukraine also claimed to have struck oil refineries in Saratov and the Komi Republic on Sunday.
Al Jazeera
5 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
What are H-1B visas and how might the Trump administration change them?
President Donald Trump's administration wants to overhaul the nation's visa programme for highly skilled foreign workers. If the administration does what one official described, it would change H-1B visa rules to favour employers that pay higher wages. That could effectively transform the visa into what one expert called 'a luxury work permit' and disadvantage early-career workers with smaller salaries, including teachers. It could also upend the current visa programme's lottery system used to distribute visas to eligible foreign workers. 'This shift may prevent many employers, including small and midsize businesses, from hiring the talent they need in shortage occupations, ultimately reducing America's global competitiveness,' said David Leopold, a former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association whose practice includes representing employers in the H-1B process. It's hard to find US workers in certain types of specialty fields, including software engineers and developers and some STEM positions. A White House office proposed the change on August 8, Bloomberg Law reported. Once the proposal appears in the Federal Register – the daily public report containing notices of proposed federal rule changes – the plan will become subject to a formal public comment period. It could be finalised within months, although it is likely to face legal challenges. Joseph Edlow, the director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services, told The New York Times in July that H-1B visas should favour companies that plan to pay foreign workers higher wages. The proposal Bloomberg Law described was in line with that goal. PolitiFact did not see a copy of the proposal, and the White House did not respond to our questions. But the Department of Homeland Security submitted the proposed rule to a Trump administration office in July, the Greenberg Traurig law firm wrote. Trump sought to reform the H-1B program during his first term but made limited progress. In January 2021, near the end of Trump's term, the Department of Homeland Security published a final rule similar to the current proposal, but the Biden administration did not implement it. Work visas were not a central part of Trump's 2024 immigration platform, but it was a point of debate in the weeks before he took office, with billionaire businessman Elon Musk – a megadonor to Trump who would briefly serve in his administration – speaking in favour of them. What are H-1B visas? The H-1B visa programme lets employers temporarily hire foreign workers in specialty fields, with about two-thirds working in computer-related jobs, according to the Congressional Research Service. Most H-1B visa holders come from India, followed by China. Currently, prospective H-1B employers must attest that they will pay the H-1B worker actual wages paid to similar employees or the prevailing wages for that occupation – whichever would result in the highest pay. To qualify for the non-immigrant visa, the employee must hold a specialised degree, license or training required by the occupation. The status is generally valid for up to three years and renewable for another three years, but it can be extended if the employer sponsors the worker for permanent residency, which includes permission to work and live in the US. Leopold said that the proposed change goes beyond the law's current wage mandate. 'This statutory mechanism is designed to prevent employers from paying H-1B workers less than their American counterparts, thereby protecting US workers from displacement,' Leopold said. Congress caps new H-1B visas at 85,000 per fiscal year, including 20,000 for noncitizens who earned advanced degrees. The government approved 400,000 H-1B applications, including renewals, in 2024, according to the nonpartisan Pew Research Center. Amazon has led the nation's employers since 2020 in its number of H-1B workers, Pew found. The New York metro area received more H-1B application approvals than any other metro area; College Station, Texas had the highest concentration of approvals. What could change with H1-B visas? The proposed policy favours higher-paid employees, experts said. Malcolm Goeschl, a San Francisco-based lawyer, said the rule will likely benefit tech companies, including many specialising in artificial intelligence. Such companies pay high salaries, including for entry-level positions. He said it will harm traditional tech companies' programmes for new graduates. 'There will likely be plenty of lottery numbers available at the top of the prevailing wage scale, but very few or none at the bottom,' Goeschl said. 'You may see young graduates shy away from the US labour market early on because of this. Or you could see companies just pay entry-level workers from other countries much higher salaries to get a chance in the lottery, leading to the perverse situation where the foreign workers are making a lot more money than similarly situated US workers.' The prevailing wage requirements are designed to protect US jobs from being undercut by lower paid foreign workers. David Bier, director of immigration studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, said the change would likely make it nearly impossible for recent immigrant college graduates, who tend to earn lower wages, to launch their careers in the United States on an H-1B visa. 'The short-term benefit would be the people who get selected are more productive, but the long-term cost might be to permanently redirect future skilled immigration to other countries,' Bier said. 'It would also effectively prohibit the H-1B for many industries that rely on it. K-12 schools in rural areas seeking bilingual teachers, for instance, will have no chance under this system.' Amid a nationwide teacher shortage, some school districts have hired H-1B visa holders, including smaller districts such as Jackson, Mississippi, and larger districts, including Dallas, Texas. Language immersion schools also often employ teachers from other countries using this visa programme. Why is there a debate about H-1B visas? The debate around H-1B visas does not neatly fall along partisan lines. Proponents say the existing visa programme allows American employers to fill gaps, compete with other countries and recruit the 'best minds'. Critics point to instances of fraud or abuse and say they favour policies that incentivise hiring Americans. In December, high-profile Republicans debated the visa programme on social media. MAGA influencer Laura Loomer denounced the programme and former Trump adviser Steve Bannon called it a 'scam'. On the other side, billionaire Elon Musk, a former H-1B visa holder whose companies employ such visa holders, called for the programme's reform but defended it as an important talent recruitment mechanism. Trump sided with Musk. 'I have many H-1B visas on my properties,' Trump told the New York Post in late December. 'I've been a believer in H-1B. I have used it many times. It's a great programme.' Senator Bernie Sanders disputed Musk, saying corporations abuse the programme as a way to get richer and should recruit American workers first. Such visa debates have continued. When US Representative Greg Murphy, a urologist, argued on X August 8 that the visas 'are critical for helping alleviate the severe physician shortage', thousands replied. Christina Pushaw, a Republican who works for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, pushed back: 'Why not figure out the causes of the domestic physician shortage and try to pass legislation to address those?'
