The White House has issued a critical report targeting the Smithsonian Institution’s leadership, accusing the National Museum of American History of promoting what it describes as “radical activist ideology” under the direction of historian Anthea M. Hartig. Released on July 4, the report coincided with the 250th anniversary of the United States and expressed concern that the museum’s approach diminishes the traditional narratives surrounding the nation’s founders in favor of politically charged perspectives.

Anthea M. Hartig, who has served as director of the National Museum of American History since 2019, is prominently cited throughout the report, which alleges that she advances a partisan agenda through museum exhibits and public statements. The report references a presentation in which Hartig described history as a “prime tool of social justice,” a phrase the White House highlighted while allegedly omitting her broader remarks emphasizing historians as “seekers of truth” and “embracers of nuance.” The report accuses the Smithsonian under her leadership of undermining public trust in American institutions and core national ideals.

Under Hartig’s tenure, the museum has shifted its focus beyond traditional presidential achievements to include exhibitions centered on the experiences of everyday Americans, often touching on issues such as race, sexuality, and colonial legacies. Among exhibitions cited in the report are “Girlhood (It’s Complicated)” (2020), which featured excerpts from a transgender child's diary, and “Entertainment Nation” (2023), which characterized Alexander Hamilton as a flawed figure partly due to his ownership of enslaved people. The museum has also engaged in initiatives to document immigrant rights activism, including sending staff to locations such as Mexico City for research.

The White House’s critique is part of a broader pattern of tension with the Smithsonian during the Trump administration, which previously targeted other Smithsonian leaders, including former National Portrait Gallery director Kim Sajet, who resigned after similar scrutiny.

Hartig’s supporters have condemned the White House report as ideologically motivated, arguing that it misrepresents her efforts and the museum’s mission. Experts in the field point to the need for a more nuanced recounting of American history that includes diverse perspectives and acknowledges complexities. Erika Lee, a Harvard historian, praised Hartig’s commitment to presenting a full historical record amid attacks on the profession. Matthew J. Garcia, a historian at Dartmouth College, said Hartig’s advocacy for underrepresented stories has been unfairly labeled ideological.

The Organization of American Historians, where Hartig has served as president, suggested that the report reflects the anxieties of its authors rather than the realities of the museum’s work. David Myers, a historian who invited Hartig to speak at the University of California, Los Angeles, described the criticism as rooted in an outdated understanding of public history, emphasizing that historians aim to engage the public with new interpretations of the past rather than preserve static narratives.

The National Museum of American History was established in 1964 as a place to illuminate the nation's heritage, a vision articulated by President Lyndon B. Johnson amidst the civil rights movement. According to former museum director John Gray, the institution continues to serve as a shared reference point for American history. He criticized politically motivated attacks on museum personnel as counterproductive to fostering a collective understanding of the country’s history.