Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Future of the National Museum of the American Latino is Uncertain

Future of the National Museum of the American Latino is Uncertain

PRESENTE! A Latino History of the United States

Credit: National Museum of the American Latino

The American Museum of the Latino faces more hurdles after over two decades of advocacy.

Congress passed legislation to allow for the creation of the Museum, along with the American Women’s History Museum, as part of the Smithsonian Institution in an online format. Five years later, new legislation introduced by Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.) wants to build a physical museum for both the Latino and women’s museums but might face pushback due to a new executive order signed by President Donald Trump.


Advocacy for the National Museum of the American Latino began in 2003, with former Reps. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) introduced a bipartisan bill to create the museum. A report titled “To Illuminate the American Story for All” authored by a presidential commission created by former President George W. Bush’s administration in 2011 stated the creation of the museum is necessary.

“The Smithsonian American Latino Museum not only as a monument for Latinos, but as a 21st Century learning laboratory rooted in the mission that every American should have access to the stories of all Americans,” the report stated.

But legislation to officially create the museum did not pass until 2020. The National Museum of the American Latino Act of 2020 was passed in Congress and signed by President Donald Trump. The legislation was included under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, which includes a subsection authorizing the museum's creation.

However, the National Museum of the American Latino is only online but has occasional in-person exhibits at its Molina Family Latino Gallery at the National Museum of American History. In February 2025, Malliotakis introduced the Smithsonian History of American Women and Latino (SHAWL) Act to build both Latino and women’s Smithsonian museums.

Malliotakis originally introduced the same legislation in August 2024 during the 117th Congress but reintroduced it for the 118th.

“The introduction of this critical bill brings us one step closer to fulfilling the dream of having both museums right where they belong — on the National Mall,” Rep. Tony Cárdenas, who joined Malliotakis in introducing the bill, stated in a press release.

According to documents from the National Museum of the American Latino, a physical museum would either be built on undeveloped land across from the National Museum of African American History and Culture or right northeast of the tidal basin.

The National Museum of the American Latino also stated that they do not comment on pending legislation.

Over at the White House on March 27, President Donald Trump recently endorsed the physical creation of the American Women’s History Museum. Still, he did not show support for the National Museum of the American Latino.

Trump endorsed building the women’s museum at an event associated with the Republican Women’s Caucus. He stated he would back Malliotakis’ legislation “100 percent.”

"The Republican Party today is the party of opportunity, security, and freedom,” Malliotakis stated in a press release.

But recently, the status of the American Museum of the Latino is uncertain as President Donald Trump signed a new executive order titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.”

The executive order stated that the Smithsonian Institution is “under the influence of a divisive, race-centered ideology.

“Over the past decade, Americans have witnessed a concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation’s history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth,” the executive order states.

President and General Counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) Thomas A. Saenz called the executive order “troubling” as in the past museums have been kept out of political debate.

“It seeks to introduce current political disputes into policy surrounding long-term preservation of history through museums and similar institutions,” Saenz said in reference to the executive order.

During his second administration, Trump has signed other executive orders seeking to eliminate “woke” initiatives related to diversity, equity, and inclusion within government agencies.

Saenz said MALDEF, which supports the civil rights of all Latinos, wants the museum to have a permanent location on the National Mall. He also added that Latino advocacy organizations and historians should decide what exhibits go in the museum. Saenz said he hopes the museum’s exhibits show the full history and story of the community rather than playing along with stereotypes, like only showing American Latinos as immigrants.

“I hope that there will be consultation with such groups, which often have an understanding of the contemporary repercussions of exclusion patterns in our history and the way that history is taught and passed on in our country,” Saenz said.

Maggie Rhoads is a student journalist attending George Washington University School of Media and Public Affairs. At The Fulcrum, she covers how legislation and policy are impacting communities.

Read More

Fulcrum Roundtable: June Rewind
stainless steel road sign
Photo by Miko Guziuk on Unsplash

Fulcrum Roundtable: June Rewind

Welcome to the Fulcrum Roundtable, formerly known as Democracy in Action, where you will find insights and discussions with Fulcrum's collaborators on some of the most talked-about topics.

Consistent with the Fulcrum's mission, this program aims to share diverse perspectives to broaden our readers' viewpoints.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Promise in the Making: Thirty-Five Years of the ADA

Americans with Disabilities Act ADA and glasses.

Getty Images

A Promise in the Making: Thirty-Five Years of the ADA

One July morning in 1990, a crowd gathered on the White House lawn, some in wheelchairs, others holding signs, many with tears in their eyes. President George H.W. Bush lifted his pen and signed his name to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)—the most sweeping civil rights law for people with disabilities in the nation's history. It was a moment three decades in the making: a rare convergence of activism, outrage, and legislative will. The ADA's promise was simple—no longer would disability mean exclusion from public life—but its implications were anything but.

Thirty-five years later, the ADA remains a landmark, a legal bulwark against discrimination, and a symbol of hard-won visibility for a community that has been too often relegated to the margins. Yet, like every civil rights law, the ADA's story is more complex than a single signature or a morning in Washington. Its passage and its legacy have always been about more than ramps and regulations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Illinois Camp Gives Underrepresented Kids an Opportunity To Explore New Pathways

Kuumba Family Festival at Evanston Township High School

Illinois Camp Gives Underrepresented Kids an Opportunity To Explore New Pathways

Summer camps in Evanston, Illinois — a quiet suburb just north of Chicago — usually consist of an array of different sports, educational programs, and even learning how to sail. But one thing is obviously apparent throughout the city’s camps: they’re almost all white.

Despite Black or African American families making up nearly 16% of Evanston’s population, Black kids are massively underrepresented throughout the city's summer camps.

Keep ReadingShow less
Students in a classroom.​

Today, Hispanic-Serving Institutions enroll 64 percent of all Latino college students.

Getty Images, andresr

Tennessee’s Attack on Federal Support for Hispanic-Serving Colleges Hurts Us All

The Tennessee Attorney General has partnered with a conservative legal nonprofit to sue the U.S. Department of Education over programming that supports Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), colleges, and universities where at least 25% of the undergraduate full-time equivalent student enrollment is Hispanic. On its face, this action claims to oppose “discriminatory” federal funding. In reality, it is part of a broader and deeply troubling trend: a coordinated effort to dismantle educational opportunity for communities of color under the guise of anti-DEI rhetoric.

As a scholar of educational policy and leadership in higher education, I believe we must confront policies that narrow access and undermine equity in education for those who have been historically underserved. What is happening in Tennessee is not just a misguided action—it’s a self-inflicted wound that will harm the state's economic future and deepen historical inequality.

Keep ReadingShow less