President Donald Trump has drawn sharp criticism from scientists and historians after signing an Executive Order aimed at curbing what he described as “anti-American ideology” within the Smithsonian Institution’s exhibitions. The move comes amid renewed debate over the biological reality of race—a concept long debunked by genetic science.
The order, titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” singles out an exhibition at the Smithsonian American Art Museum—The Shape of Power: Stories of Race and American Sculpture—for asserting that race is a social construct, not a biological reality. The White House document criticizes the exhibition for promoting what it calls a “divisive narrative,” suggesting such interpretations “distort our shared history.”
But leading geneticists say the exhibit’s message reflects decades of scientific consensus. Since the landmark Human Genome Project published its first draft in 2000, genetic research has consistently shown that race has no biological foundation. In fact, genetic variation within so-called racial groups is often greater than that between them.
“Human variation is real,” said geneticist and science historian Adam Rutherford, “but race as a biological category simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. It’s a social invention, not a genetic reality.”
Rutherford and other experts point to centuries of flawed racial categorisation, tracing it back to 18th-century scientist Carl Linnaeus, who divided humanity into four “types” based largely on skin color and associated them with offensive behavioral stereotypes. These early systems laid the groundwork for what is now called “scientific racism”—pseudoscientific attempts to rank human populations hierarchically by race.
Despite overwhelming evidence against it, the notion of race as a biological reality still surfaces in public discourse, scientific literature, and healthcare frameworks. Trump’s recent order underscores how such outdated ideas continue to influence policy.
The Smithsonian, along with many academic institutions, maintains that race is a cultural and historical concept, not a genetic one. “Museums are not only places to learn about history but to challenge how that history has been told,” one museum spokesperson said.
Meanwhile, scientists warn that dismissing established genetic science for political motives risks distorting public understanding and policy-making. “This isn’t about ideology,” said Rutherford. “It’s about what the science has shown us: our shared humanity is far deeper than the labels we’ve imposed on ourselves.”
The controversy highlights a broader struggle over how history, science, and identity are represented in American institutions—one that shows no sign of easing as politics and genetics collide.
