Smithsonian Alters Trump Impeachment Display Amidst History Debate

National Archives Under Scrutiny for Content Curation

The Smithsonian Institution’s recent removal of references to President **Donald Trump’s** impeachments from an American presidency exhibition has ignited a broader discussion about how national history is documented and presented.

Exhibit Adjustment Sparks Controversy

The institution confirmed Friday it had taken down a panel referencing the 2019 and 2021 impeachments of **Donald Trump**. The removal came after a review of “legacy content.” A spokesperson stated the exhibit will eventually incorporate all impeachments, though no timeline was provided.

The move follows **Trump’s** repeated calls for federal institutions to emphasize national achievements over what he has characterized as “divisive” aspects of the past. A White House spokesperson, **Davis Ingle**, commented, “We are fully supportive of updating displays to highlight American greatness.”

Controlling the Historical Narrative

Experts suggest this action aligns with a pattern observed during the **Trump** administration, which included renaming a Navy ship previously honoring a gay rights activist and efforts to defund public broadcasting. According to **Julian E. Zelizer**, a professor at Princeton University, these actions represent a broader attempt to shape historical representation.

“Based on what we have been seeing, this is part of a broader effort by the president to influence and shape how history is depicted at museums, national parks, and schools. Not only is he pushing a specific narrative of the United States but, in this case, trying to influence how Americans learn about his own role in history.”

—Julian E. Zelizer, Professor of History and Public Affairs

The power to control historical memory is a potent tool for maintaining authority. In countries like China and Russia, the state actively curates or suppresses historical accounts to uphold ruling narratives. **Jason Stanley**, an expert on authoritarianism, noted that controlling the past is crucial for creating a “fake history that props up their politics.”

History as Documentation vs. Narrative

The debate centers on whether historical presentations should primarily document events or serve a particular narrative. This tension is not new, with figures throughout history, including **Jackie Kennedy** and **Ronald Reagan**, actively managing their public image and the historical accounts of their lives.

Recent data from the American Historical Association indicates that 72% of Americans believe that preserving historical sites and documents is important for understanding the nation’s identity (American Historical Association, 2023).

**Robin Wagner-Pacifici**, professor emerita of sociology, emphasizes the role of exhibits in helping individuals “situate ourselves in history.” She argues that omitting key events, such as impeachments, can hinder this process.

“The legitimacy of those in power has to be reconstituted constantly. They can never rest on their laurels.”

—Robin Wagner-Pacifici, Professor Emerita of Sociology

**Timothy Naftali**, former director of the Richard M. Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, expressed disappointment with the Smithsonian’s decision. He stated that museum directors “should have red lines” and that altering the Trump panel crossed one of them.

The Smithsonian’s action underscores how deeply intertwined political power and historical interpretation can be, highlighting the ongoing struggle to define national memory.