On January 22, tensions erupted at the President’s House site in Philadelphia’s Chinatown as National Park Service (NPS) staff removed panels from an exhibit addressing slavery and the lives of the nine enslaved people owned by George Washington, including Ona Judge. The removal occurred amid implementation of a 2025 executive order issued under former President Donald Trump aimed at promoting a more celebratory narrative of American history, discouraging interpretations deemed to disparage the nation or its founders.

Mijuel Johnson, a Philadelphia native and tour guide at the site, witnessed the removal and expressed deep personal anguish. “Being born and raised a multi-generation Philadelphian, a fifth-generation descendant of chattel slavery, I feel a very personal connection to this house,” Johnson said. The exhibit, which stood out for emphasizing the experiences of the enslaved rather than lionizing Washington himself, drew the ire of the Department of the Interior, which instructed the NPS to replace it with plaques focusing more on Washington and John Adams. These revisions downplayed slavery and glossed over Washington’s conflicted stance on the institution.

The President’s House, the first executive mansion from 1790 to 1797, remains a foundational site in Philadelphia, longtime home of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution signings. The original mansion no longer stands; only its foundations remain, with walls reconstructed to represent the layout. The exhibit incorporated the names of the enslaved people and symbolic footprints marking Judge’s historic flight to freedom.

Following the dismantling of the panels, the City of Philadelphia filed suit against the federal government, arguing that the removal breached an agreement with the NPS. U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe sided with the city, mandating the restoration of the exhibit and strongly condemning the government’s actions as an attempt to obscure historical truths. NPS staff began reinstalling the panels, but a White House appeal has delayed full compliance, leaving half the panels in storage. In their place, community activists have mounted handwritten notes and photocopies, reading the removed text aloud to visitors.

The controversy reflects broader national debates over historical interpretation, intensifying as the nation approaches its 250th anniversary of independence. Similar removals or revisions addressing slavery, civil rights, climate change, indigenous history, and labor movements have occurred at sites from Golden Gate National Park in California to Glacier National Park in Montana. Critics characterize these actions as efforts to promote a sanitized and whitewashed version of American history.

John Dichtl, president of the American Association for State and Local History, described the federal efforts as “an obvious attempt by the White House to pick one kind of history and downgrade and erase everything else.” He also warned that museums and historic sites may self-censor to avoid political backlash.

The Smithsonian Institution, overseeing 21 museums, has faced scrutiny under the order as well. Trump’s administration accused it of promoting a “divisive, race-centered ideology,” and sought to remove Kim Sajet, director of the National Portrait Gallery. Artist Amy Sherald withdrew an exhibit following concerns from officials about a painting depicting the Statue of Liberty as a Black transgender person. In December, a White House letter demanded that the Smithsonian submit details of exhibits to ensure they conveyed a positive view of American history, a directive coming from Russell Vought, a senior adviser tied to Trump’s policy initiatives for a potential second term.

Despite political pressure, some institutions continue to highlight complex narratives. The National Museum of American History’s 250th anniversary exhibition, “In Pursuit of Life, Liberty & Happiness,” features artifacts chronicling struggles for civil rights, LGBTQ+ acceptance, and racial justice. Curator Theodore Gonzalves affirmed a commitment to historical truth and reported no requests to alter content.

As the controversy endures, the debate over how American history is told, and who gets to shape that narrative, remains a focal point of cultural and political conflict nationwide.