Trump Moves to Erase Graphic Slavery Imagery from National Parks

16 September 2025

Donald Trump; The Scourged Back. Credit : Francis Chung/Politico/Bloomberg via Getty; Ken Welsh/Design Pics/Universal Images Group via Getty

In a move stirring sharp debate, President Donald Trump has reportedly ordered the removal of certain exhibits in U.S. national parks tied to the brutal history of slavery. Among the items flagged for removal is the famous 1863 photograph known as “The Scourged Back,” showing the scarred back of Peter (also known as Gordon), a formerly enslaved man whose wounds from whippings became a powerful visual during the Civil War.

The directive originates in Trump’s executive order from March called “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.” That order directs the Interior Department to eliminate materials deemed as reflecting a “corrosive ideology” that the administration sees as unfairly tarnishing historical American figures or institutions. Under the order, National Park Service officials are reviewing signs, exhibits, and interpretive materials in parks, historic sites, and affiliated museum displays. They are examining not only imagery but also information relating to slavery, racism, sexism, LGBTQ rights, and Indigenous persecution.

Among the many places under review are Harpers Ferry National Historical Park in West Virginia, and the President’s House Site in Philadelphia, a site associated with George Washington, who enslaved nine people during his lifetime. Exhibits at both of these sites include educational signage and displays that address the history of slavery and its effect on enslaved people as well as broader themes of racial discrimination. These displays are now seen by some officials as non-compliant with the executive order’s directive.

Officials from the National Park Service stated that all signage is currently under review and have noted that materials which “disproportionately emphasize negative aspects of U.S. history,” without contextual balance or mention of national progress, are the ones in question. The agency spokeswoman Rachel Pawlitz said that while it is important to confront the more painful chapters of history, there is concern that some interpretations may distort understanding if they focus too heavily on negativity without showing broader narratives of progress.

Critics of the move warn that removing or hiding these materials amounts to a sanitization of history. Historians point out that images like “The Scourged Back” helped many in the North understand the violence of slavery in visceral terms. The photograph was circulated in its time as proof of the physical toll of plantation slavery and contributed to public opinion toward abolition. Its removal or suppression would erase a part of historical record that many feel must remain accessible.

Others worry that this directive is part of a broader pattern of restricting public memory under the guise of protecting national pride. The Trump administration has also criticized institutions such as the Smithsonian for what it calls excessive focus on the darker parts of America’s history, describing them as “woke” and claiming they dwell too much on how “bad” slavery was, rather than celebrating accomplishments. In one recent Truth Social post Trump accused the Smithsonian of being out of control for purportedly emphasizing horrors of slavery and neglecting more uplifting facets of history.

Opponents say that the complexity of history means we must include both the painful truths and the achievements. They argue that places like national parks and historical sites are among the few publicly funded settings meant to offer comprehensive and honest accounts of the nation’s past. To remove or diminish painful history may comfort some but risks miseducating many. They warn that erasing physical representations of suffering, violence, or injustice does not make them disappear.

As part of the executive order, Vice President J.D. Vance in his role with the Smithsonian Board of Regents has also been directed to oversee review of materials in Smithsonian-affiliated institutions for content that could be seen as “divisive, race-centered ideology.” Relatedly, park services have reportedly asked staff and visitors to report signage or gifts or exhibit items that may violate the directive.

Defenders of the policy say it is about balance. They assert that while acknowledging the darker chapters of history remains crucial, these exhibits should not exclusively frame American identity through suffering or shame. Supporters claim the nation also deserves to see its achievements, its progress, its moments of unity. The executive order’s language argues that content which is “disparaging” to historic Americans should give way to portrayals that reflect qualities of “success, brightness, future” rather than only historical failure or oppression.

The question now is how far this review and removal process will go. Will entire sites close exhibits? Will interpretive panels be rewritten? Will donor-funded exhibits be recalled? The uncertainty has public historians, civil rights groups, educators, and citizens bracing for what many call a kind of historical erasure. For some visitors to national parks and historic homes, the very stories that inform the country’s foundation are at risk of being softened or hidden.

Ultimately, this policy highlights a tension at the heart of how nations remember their own histories. What gets preserved and displayed influences how people understand identity, justice, and belonging. When painful images like “The Scourged Back” are under threat of removal it is not only about an artifact or a photo it is about what stories are considered worthy of transmission to future generations.