Connect with us

Politics

Trump downsized national monuments. Biden restored them. Project 2025 calls for reductions again

Published

on

Trump downsized national monuments. Biden restored them. Project 2025 calls for reductions again

They are sprawling lands of seemingly endless vistas and soaring plateaus. The red canyons are sprinkled with ancient rock art and historic Indigenous settlements. Normally nonconfrontational paleontologists were so wowed by their fossils that they sued to try to protect the land.

Two Democratic presidents moved to preserve this rugged terrain by creating a pair of national monuments in southern Utah — Bears Ears and Grand Staircase- Escalante.

President Trump radically reduced the borders of the two monuments, then their status was reversed again when President Biden took office and essentially restored protection of the original lands.

Another reversal seems all but certain if Trump retakes the White House. Experts say that this year’s election also brings attention to a broader question: What will happen to millions of acres of land concentrated in the West and owned by the U.S. government?

Trump has already shown his desire to throw open more of the land for oil drilling, mining and logging. And a Supreme Court heavily influenced by Trump-appointed justices has hinted it would like to review the power of presidents to create national monuments.

Advertisement

Trump appointees Brett M. Kavanaugh and Neil M. Gorsuch signaled this year that they want to review President Obama’s expansion of Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument on the Oregon-California state line. And in 2021, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. announced his skepticism about another of Obama’s monument designations — of an underwater preserve larger than Yellowstone National Park off the New England coast. `

“Which of the following is not like the others: (a) a monument, (b) an antiquity (defined as a “relic or monument of ancient times”) or (c) 5,000 square miles of land beneath the ocean?” Roberts wrote in a statement, even as the court declined to take up the case.

And a controversial plan drawn up by conservatives as a blueprint for the next Republican administration would have Trump go even further if elected: It calls on him to repeal the Antiquities Act of 1906, the law that allowed presidents of both parties to make monuments of nearly 160 archaeological sites, historic landmarks and other outstanding scientific or historic locations.

Project 2025 says the monument law has been overused and that public lands need to remain open to a wide range of uses — including oil drilling, coal mining and recreation. That fits with Trump’s pledge, if he wins a second term, to “drill, baby, drill.”

Trump has said he had nothing to do with Project 2025 and though it has many ideas — “some good, some bad” — he does not intend to read it. The authors of some portions of the plan previously worked for Trump and at least some are expected to return in a second Trump administration..

Advertisement

Lawyer William Perry Pendley served in the first Trump administration, as the top official in the Bureau of Land Management, though he said its premature to speculate whether he would serve in a second Trump administration.

In Project 2025, Pendley accuses the Biden administration of “implementing a vast regulatory regime,” beyond that envisioned by Congress, and effectively banning almost all “productive economic uses” of federal lands managed by the Interior Department.

Environmental and tribal organizations have expressed the opposite view, noting that it was Trump who made the largest reduction in monument-protected lands in history and who would be likely to grant even more corporate access to public lands in a second term.

“Project 2025 is an example of what it would look like to sell off America’s natural resources and public lands to corporations with little-to-no regard for the environment, the climate, taxpayers, or wildlife,” wrote the Center for Western Priorities, a nonprofit that has resisted the push to transfer federal lands to state and private ownership.

Other issues — such as the economy, immigration, abortion and fair elections — have topped the agenda during the presidential campaign, while the environment, climate change and public land priorities have mostly taken a back seat.

Advertisement

That may be in part because most of the land owned by the U.S. government lies in Western states, most of which (with the exceptions of Arizona and Nevada) will not be closely decided in the presidential race.

The federal government owns less than 5% of the land east of the Mississippi River, but nearly half of the acreage in 11 Western states in the Lower 48, controlled mostly by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service.

Pilot Rock rises into the clouds in the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument near Lincoln, Ore.

(Jeff Barnard / Associated Press)

Advertisement

Conservatives in many of those states have been campaigning for decades to try to wrest control of some of that property from the federal government, saying that decisions about its use should be made closer to home.

Environmentalists have countered that federal officials are in the best position to protect land that is treasured by all Americans, not just those in a particular state or community.

Last week’s vice presidential debate offered a rare moment in campaign 2024 in which the candidates’ sharply different views about public lands leaped onto the national stage.

Asked about the crisis in affordable housing, Republican vice presidential candidate JD Vance declared that “a lot of federal lands … aren’t being used for anything,” and “could be places where we build a lot of housing.”

Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz disagreed. He said open space has been kept that way “for a reason” and that the country needed a better solution than saying, “Let’s take this federal land and let’s sell it.”

Advertisement

Republicans in Utah celebrated in 2017 when Trump rolled back the boundaries of sprawling Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante, which lie roughly 100 miles apart in the southern part of the state. The then-president slashed Bears Ears by about 85%, down to 201,876 acres. He cut the second monument from 1.9 million acres to a little over 1 million acres.

Trump accused Democratic Presidents Obama and Clinton of setting aside far too much land to protect the archaeology and other resources that were the object of the monument designations.

“Some people think that the natural resources of Utah should be controlled by a small handful of very distant bureaucrats located in Washington,” Trump said. “And guess what? They’re wrong.”

Some Utah residents welcomed the Republican’s new designations and the jobs they said looser protections would be likely to create. But about 3,000 demonstrators, including tribal members, protested on the day of Trump’s action. They said the monument status helped protect cultural resources, including petroglyphs and centuries-old cave dwellings.

The shifting between Democratic and Republican administrations has meant a whipsawing between philosophies — with the Trump-era management plan for the Utah monuments remaining in place while Biden administration management plans are embroiled in a painstaking approval process.

Advertisement

The nonprofit that helps oversee conservation and programs at Grand Staircase-Escalante says it has been challenging to keep up with the flood of new visitors that came with the Trump administration’s less restrictive policies. The Trump management plan allows, for example, a doubling of the size of groups that can visit the monument, to 25.

“This doesn’t sound like a lot, but a group of 25 people leaves much greater amounts of human waste and other trash compared to a group of 12,” Jackie Grant, executive director of Grand Staircase-Escalante Partners, said in an email. “Human excrement can take over a year to decompose in the desert environment of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. Now imagine the impact of 500,000 to a million people pooping in a fairly limited desert area over the course of a year.”

The group size limit is expected to be reduced in the Biden administration management plan, which is nearing completion.

The Trump plan also opened more remote roads to use by all-terrain vehicles. The opening of the V-Road in the Escalante Canyons section of the monument has left the area — under consideration for higher protection as a wilderness area — marred by vandalism, trash and more human waste.

That damage came with little of the “economic expansion by way of natural resource extraction” that state officials had promised, Grant said.

Advertisement
William Perry Pendley, shown in 2019

William Perry Pendley, who was director of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management under President Trump, wrote a section of Project 2025 calling for the downsizing of the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument.

(Associated Press)

Pendley, the former Trump BLM official, has been fighting for more state and local control of public lands since he served in the administration of Republican Ronald Reagan. He wrote “Sagebrush Rebel,” a book about Reagan’s fight against what he saw as excessive federal control of Western lands.

Pendley’s Project 2025 plan calls for a downsizing of Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, saying the area should be governed by a historic agreement that predated the monument. It would allow greater harvesting of timber on BLM land, creating well-paying jobs and reducing fuel for future wildfires, Pendley argues.

The Wyoming-reared lawyer says that many laws enacted after the Antiquities Act — to protect endangered species and wild and scenic rivers, for example — create adequate protections for the outdoors.

Advertisement

Advocates for Cascade-Siskiyou and other monuments say presidents have used their monument-making power wisely. They point to the Grand Canyon in Arizona and Denali in Alaska as among the many monuments that went on to become beloved national parks.

Dave Willis, a horse packer who lives on monument land in Oregon, has been fighting for creation and preservation of the Cascade-Siskiyou monument for decades. The intent of Trump allies to open the property to timber harvest is just part of a “scorched-earth policy with regard to all public lands,” he said.

“Americans really care about their public lands,” Willis said. “And when someone threatens them, they are not going to take it lying down. Trying to degrade public lands will put you on the wrong side of history.”

Advertisement

Politics

Fraud-plagued Minnesota sues Trump admin for withholding $243M in Medicaid payments

Published

on

Fraud-plagued Minnesota sues Trump admin for withholding 3M in Medicaid payments

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Minnesota filed a federal lawsuit Monday against the Trump administration, accusing federal health officials of illegally withholding $243 million in Medicaid payments from the state.

Attorney General Keith Ellison and the Minnesota Department of Human Services sued the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), arguing the funding freeze violates federal law.

The state is seeking a temporary restraining order to immediately block the action.

The dispute stems from a January notice in which the Trump administration said it would withhold more than $2 billion annually from Minnesota’s Medicaid program over what it described as “noncompliance” with federal regulations, specifically, alleged failures to “adequately identify, prevent, and address fraud in its Medicaid program.”

Advertisement

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison speaks during a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing on Capitol Hill. (Tom Brenner/AP)

State officials say they have not been told specifically how Minnesota is out of compliance or what changes the administration wants to see.

The lawsuit follows a Feb. 25 announcement from CMS that it was deferring roughly $260 million in quarterly federal Medicaid funding to Minnesota, including about $243 million tied to “unsupported or potentially fraudulent” claims. 

CMS said the deferral is part of a broader fraud crackdown and cited unusually high spending and rapid growth in personal care services, home- and community-based services, and other practitioner services.

HEAVILY-REDACTED AUDIT FINDS MINNESOTA MEDICAID HAD WIDESPREAD VULNERABILITIES

Advertisement

Vice President JD Vance looks on as Medicare and Medicaid Administrator Mehmet Oz speaks about combating fraud at the White House complex in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 25, 2026. (Oliver Contreras/AFP via Getty Images)

“For decades, Medicare fraud has drained billions from American taxpayers — that ends now,” HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a statement. “We are replacing the old ‘pay and chase’ model with a real-time ‘detect and deploy’ strategy, using advanced AI tools to identify fraud instantly and stop improper payments before they go out the door.”

Minnesota officials contend the move improperly uses a funding “deferral” mechanism and amounts to denying the state due process before any formal finding of noncompliance.

WALZ SLAMS TRUMP ADMIN FOR TEMPORARILY HALTING MEDICAID FUNDING TO MINNESOTA: ‘CAMPAIGN OF RETRIBUTION’

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

The threatened cuts represent about 7% of Minnesota’s quarterly Medicaid funding and could force reductions in health care services for low-income residents, according to Ellison’s office.

“Trump’s M.O. is to cut first, no matter what the law says or who gets hurt, and ask questions later, if at all,” the attorney general said. “These cuts are the latest in a long series of efforts to go around the law to punish Minnesotans — but just as we fought back and won when they illegally tried to cut funding for childcare, hungry families, and our schools, we are suing them again today to make them follow the law.”

Related Article

USDA immediately suspends all federal funding to Minnesota amid fraud investigation
Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Fearing GOP win, California’s Democratic leader urges unviable party candidates for governor to drop out

Published

on

Fearing GOP win, California’s Democratic leader urges unviable party candidates for governor to drop out

Fearing the prospect of a Republican winning California’s gubernatorial race, state Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks on Tuesday urged his party’s candidates who lack a viable path to victory to drop out.

“It is imperative that every candidate honestly assess the viability of their candidacy and campaign,” Hicks wrote in an open letter to the politicians vying to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom. “I recognize my suggestions are hard for many to contemplate and may be even viewed as overly harsh by some.”

Hicks did not name the Democrats he wants out of the race, but such a public admonishment by a party leader is a rarity in California politics.

Even though the odds are relatively low, California cannot risk having a Republican elected as the next governor at a time when President Trump is in the White House, Hicks said.

“[S]o much is at stake in our Nation and so many are counting on the leadership of California Democrats to stand up and speak out at this historic moment,” Hicks wrote. “California’s leadership on the world stage is significantly harder if a Democrat is not elected as our next Governor.”

Advertisement

Hicks urged Democrats languishing at the bottom of the field of candidates to drop out before the Friday deadline to officially file to run for governor — to ensure their names do not appear on the June primary ballot.

Under California’s top-two primary system, the two candidates who receive the most votes in the June primary advance to the November general election, regardless of party.

With nine top Democrats running, the fear is that the candidates will splinter their party’s vote and allow the top two Republicans in the race to finish in first and second place. This is despite Democratic registered voters outnumbering Republicans in the state by almost 2 to 1, and no GOP candidate winning a statewide election since 2006.

Having two Republicans competing in the November election would be devastating to Democratic voter turnout and could hurt party candidates in pivotal down-ballot races.

“The result would present a real risk to winning the congressional seats required and imperil Democrats’ chances to retake the House, cut Donald Trump’s term in half, and spare our Nation from the pain many have endured since January 2025,” Hicks said in his letter. “We simply can’t let that happen.”

Advertisement

A recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of California found that five candidates lead the contest — former Rep. Katie Porter, Rep. Eric Swalwell and hedge fund founder Tom Steyer among Democrats and conservative commentator Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, both Republicans. Hilton and Bianco have led all candidates in other polls over the last few months. No other candidate received the support of more than 5% of likely voters.

After Hicks issued his directive, two influential leaders in California Democratic politics said they shared his concerns.

Lorena Gonzalez, the head of the California Federation of Labor Unions, said she worries that Democratic candidates who are drawing low single-digit support in the polls and remain in the race could tilt the election.

“You’re in a situation where a candidate who pulls 2 or 3% could make all the difference whether there’s two Republicans and anti-union folks in the runoff or if there’s not,” she said.

Gonzalez said that while she believes the legislature, where Democrats hold super majorities in both chambers, would be a check if a Republican was elected the state’s leader, that might not be enough protect Californians from Trump’s destructive policies.

Advertisement

“We are seeing with Trump how much damage an executive who wants to ignore normal rules of engagement or the Constitution can do,” she said. “We can’t afford that.”

The federation began its endorsement process last week, and there were difficult conversations with gubernatorial candidates not only about their political beliefs, but also about their viability. The umbrella group of unions is expected to make an announcement about any potential endorsement on March 16.

Jodi Hicks, CEO and president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, said it was imperative to block the “real possibility” of two Republicans advancing to the general election because of the deep cuts that the Trump administration has made to health care, including access to abortion.

“Given the severity of this moment, we urge candidates to consider how continuing their candidacy may put California’s values and reproductive freedom at risk,” Jodi Hicks said. “The stakes are too high for all of us, but especially for immigrant communities, transgender individuals, the over 15 million patients enrolled in Medi-Cal, and the over 25,000 patients a week who access essential health care at Planned Parenthood health centers.”

Discussions about the need for some Democrats to exit the race took place at last weekend’s California Democratic Party convention.

Advertisement

But a politically thorny issue is that nearly all of the Democrats lagging in the polls are people of color, as former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra noted at a candidate forum Monday evening.

“There are people who are calling for candidates to get out of the race,” he said at the gathering hosted by Equality California and the Los Angeles LGBT Center at the Renberg Theatre in Hollywood. “Isn’t it interesting that the candidates they are asking get out of the race are the candidates of color?”

Rusty Hicks, asked about the effect on minority candidates who have spent years or decades of their lives in public service, did not directly answer the question but lauded the field’s accomplishments.

“We have a number of strong candidates. They have incredible stories, and they are reflective of the diversity of our party. That being said, there are some political realities of where we are at at this particular moment,” he said in an interview. “I’m not calling on any specific candidates to move in one direction or the other. I’m just calling on them to assess their campaign and determine if they have a viable [path] and if they don’t, to not file.”

During Monday evening’s gubernatorial forum, Porter said she is concerned about the prospect of two Republicans making the top two.

Advertisement

“I hear people say to me, it could never happen, but everybody said that about Trump too,” she said at the forum. “And I look at how much harm we’re suffering, and I think about all the political risks that people are facing every day, the risk of an immigrant to leave their home and walk on our streets, the risk of a kid who’s trans to try to play sports even in this state. And I just don’t think we can take any more political risks.”

Times staff writer Phil Willon contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Politics

How President Trump’s Image Permeates the White House and Beyond

Published

on

How President Trump’s Image Permeates the White House and Beyond

Since moving back in, President Trump has significantly altered the “People’s House.” East Wing: gone. Oval Office: maximalized. Rose Garden: Mar-a-lago-ified. And the art? Lots of Trump.

Advertisement

Over the last year, The New York Times has captured at least nine paintings, posters, memes, and even a mugshot outside the Oval Office, that Mr. Trump added throughout the historic space.

Many of the selections are gifts from his supporters that highlight his political stature and reinforce the idea that Mr. Trump is invincible.

Advertisement

All presidents or first ladies add to and shuffle the art in the White House.

Barack Obama brought in abstract paintings.

Advertisement

Family Dining Room, 2015. Gabriella Demczuk for The New York Times

George W. Bush decorated with images from his Texas roots.

Advertisement

Oval Office, 2007. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Advertisement

In Mr. Trump’s first term, Melania Trump added a sculpture by Isamu Noguchi to the Rose Garden.

Rose Garden, 2020. Pool photo by Chris Kleponis

Advertisement

But never before has a sitting president displayed so much of his own image on the White House walls.

There is an “assertion of symbolic power that he wants to be on view essentially everywhere in that space,” said Cara Finnegan, a communication professor at the University of Illinois and author of “Photographic Presidents: Making History from Daguerreotype to Digital.”

Advertisement

Even outside his current residence, Mr. Trump’s visage has proliferated in unexpected places — on banners hanging from government buildings, on National Parks passes and on social media, where he has been likened to a king. There has also been talk of a U.S. Treasury-minted coin with Mr. Trump on both sides.

Break with tradition

In recent decades, each president’s official White House portrait has been unveiled in a ceremony hosted by his successor.

Advertisement

The Carters hosted the Fords:

Advertisement

East Room, 1978. Associated Press

The Clintons hosted the Bushes:

Advertisement

East Room, 1995. Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

And the Bushes hosted the Clintons:

Advertisement

East Room, 2004. Tim Sloan/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

The mood has often been lighthearted, with political party tensions melting away.

Advertisement

“I am pleased that my portrait brings an interesting symmetry to the White House collection,” George W. Bush joked in a ceremony hosted by the Obamas. “It now starts and ends with a George W.”

In a break with tradition, Mr. Trump did not schedule a ceremony for the unveiling of the Obamas’ portraits during his first term. Joe Biden later did, in a ceremony with a “Welcome Home!” vibe.

Advertisement

Typically, the latest available presidential portrait — often a realistic oil painting — hangs in the main entrance hall, where heads of state are welcomed.

The Obama portrait was in the spot until April …

Advertisement

Cross Hall in the Executive Residence, 2024. Tom Brenner for The New York Times

… when Mr. Trump replaced it with this painting by Marc Lipp, a Florida pop artist, last April.

Advertisement

Cross Hall in the Executive Residence, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

It depicts a striking moment in 2024 when a bloodied Mr. Trump pumped his fist in defiance, soon after being shot at by a would-be assassin during a campaign event.

Advertisement

Presidential historians have criticized the departure from convention.

Though Mr. Trump had a portrait commissioned for the Smithsonian’s American Presidents collection after his first term, none was confirmed for the permanent White House collection, and the White House said that this is where that portrait would have hung.

Advertisement

It is not totally unprecedented for a president to hang a painting of himself in the White House during his term. Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft and Grover Cleveland all did, according to the White House Historical Association. But more often than not, paintings of presidents and first ladies are hung after they have left office, historians said.

Flags, fists and faith from fans

In what has become something of a muse for many of the president’s artistic supporters, there are at least three other depictions of the fist-pumping scene in the White House.

Advertisement

The image “is in people’s garages when I walk around my neighborhood,” said Leslie Hahner, a Texas resident and communication professor at Baylor University, who studies visual political culture. “People love that image.”

Behind the Oval Office, one is in a small room that houses Trump merchandise:

Advertisement

Oval Office study, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Another was seen in the West Wing next to a “Still Life with Fruit” painting from 1850:

Advertisement

West Wing, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Advertisement

A statue form was spotted in the Oval Office:

Oval Office, 2025. Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times

Advertisement

The sculptor, Stan Watts, told a Utah TV station last year that he believes the president was saved by God that day. Many of Mr. Trump’s Christian supporters have echoed that sentiment.

At least two works by a self-described “Christian worship artist,” Vanessa Horabuena, are among Mr. Trump’s White House collection. He has called Ms. Horabuena, who often paints live in front of an audience, “one of the greatest artists anywhere in the world.”

Advertisement

In 2022, she painted a portrait of Mr. Trump at a booth at the Conservative Political Action Conference. When he saw it, he asked to meet her, Ms. Horabuena’s representative said. She most recently painted Mr. Trump live at a New Year’s Eve party at Mar-A-Lago.

One of her portraits was spotted in the Cabinet room in January.

It shows Mr. Trump, his eyes closed, in front of a mountain with a small cross on the top:

Advertisement

Cabinet Room, 2026. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Advertisement

Ms. Horabuena hand-delivered it to the White House, according to her website.

Her other painting shows the president walking through a phalanx of flags. It was seen hanging prominently in a hallway leading to the Cabinet Room and the Oval Office:

Advertisement

West Wing, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

“He’s positioned as this embattled warrior in a lot of these images,” Dr. Hahner said.

Advertisement

Historical figures Mr. Trump adulates are co-stars in some of the art he has chosen.

In an image created by the team of White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, Mr. Trump is pictured with William McKinley and Henry Clay, who, like the president, championed the use of tariffs:

Advertisement

West Wing, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Here, Mr. Trump is with two other Republican presidents, Abraham Lincoln (to whom he has compared himself) and Ronald Reagan (whom he is a fan of):

Advertisement

West Wing, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Titled “Great American Patriots,” the piece was painted by Dick Bobnick, an illustrator and Trump supporter from Minnesota. He said he mailed several prints to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but he had no idea his work was on the White House walls until a USA Today reporter called him about it.

Advertisement

“I could hardly believe it,” said Mr. Bobnick. (He said the print is now his best-seller.)

If not in portraits, Mr. Trump’s image is reflected on mirrors that he has added to the White House complex.

Advertisement

Two are in the Oval Office …

Oval Office, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

Advertisement

… making his image visible from the Resolute Desk.

Advertisement

Oval Office, 2025. Doug Mills/The New York Times

The mirrors, the portraits and the gilding mimic the look of his properties, like Mar-a-Lago, his Florida estate.

Advertisement

Mar-a-Lago, 2016. Eric Thayer for The New York Times

“Trump is obsessed with his image,” Dr. Hahner said. “And he is so controlling of his image.”

Advertisement

Trump everywhere, all the time

One portrait seen in the White House has become a communication tool between Mr. Trump and his supporters in the real world.

This is his social media profile picture.

Advertisement

Trump’s Truth Social account, 2025.

Advertisement

It was seen last October hanging between former first ladies Laura Bush and Barbara Bush in the now-demolished East Wing:

Booksellers Hall in the now-demolished East Wing, 2025. Cheriss May for The New York Times

Advertisement

The portrait was painted by Lena Ruseva, an immigrant from the former Soviet Union, who goes by the name MAGALANGELO. Mr. Trump invited her to his Bedminster golf club in 2022, and she gave it to him as a birthday gift.

“Every time social media or the news quotes the president and I see my artwork alongside it, I feel proud and grateful,” she said.

Advertisement

For a time, the same portrait hung next to Hillary Clinton, his political rival and a former first lady.

Booksellers Hall in the now-demolished East Wing, 2025. Alex Brandon/Associated Press

Advertisement

Supporters at that time lauded the placement on social media:

This example of a positive feedback loop demonstrates how Mr. Trump has used social media to redefine the presidency and presidential communication. Ms. Ruseva’s portrait was used on social media, hung up in the real world, then photographed and put back on social media by supporters who praised the president.

Advertisement

When Mr. Trump was elected to his first term in 2016, Dr. Hahner said that scholars referred to him as the first “meme president.”

Mr. Trump and his internet fans are used to a meme culture based on irony, and rehashing, repurposing and remixing existing images. The collection of White House artwork — much of it originating from his supporters — sits in an uncanny valley between realism and meme-ism, Dr. Hahner said.

Advertisement

Like memes that multiply, Mr. Trump’s image has been reproduced in other ways, outside the White House.

Last month, a huge banner with Mr. Trump’s face was draped outside the Justice Department headquarters …

Advertisement

Justice Department headquarters, 2026. Eric Lee for The New York Times

Last year, similar signage was strung over the Labor Department building …

Advertisement

Labor Department building, 2025. Eric Lee for The New York Times

… and the Agriculture Department building (this one, alongside Lincoln).

Advertisement

Agriculture Department building, 2025. Eric Lee for The New York Times

Advertisement

At his request, Mr. Trump’s portrait was recently updated at the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery:

National Portrait Gallery, 2026. Alyssa Schukar for The New York Times

Advertisement

Still, Mr. Trump wants more. The White House has suggested that the National Portrait Gallery add a separate section for Trump-related art.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending