This morning the Trump administration released its “America First” budget blueprint. We are not surprised by either the breadth or depth of the recommended cuts, given the rhetoric, rumors, and policy rationales that have circulated through Washington over the past two months. Indeed this expectation has shaped our general “wait until the document lands” approach to action alerts. As we have emphasized before, we ask our members to act only when we think it’s an issue of vital importance and will make a difference.
President Donald J. Trump’s new executive order on immigration was supposed to go into effect today. The new order was slightly narrower in scope than the original—it suspended travel from six countries instead of seven, and made exceptions for certain visa holders and US legal permanent residents. It also no longer singled out Syrian refugees for indefinite exclusion from the United States—all refugee settlement, including for those fleeing Syria, would have been temporarily suspended for four months pending further review.
Facing extensive criticism and litigation of his first executive order restricting entry into the United States, President Donald Trump has issued a revised executive order (#13780), this time citing historical evidence in support of the policy restricting immigration and refugee resettlement. The American Historical Association has applied the discipline’s professional standards to the revised directive and found that it does not pass historical muster. Moreover, like its predecessor EO 13769, the order “stands at odds with the values stated in our nation’s founding documents.”
On February 28th, AHA president Tyler Stovall sent a letter to the Secretary of Homeland Security protesting the recent detainment of Henry Rousso, distinguished historian of the Holocaust in France. Professor Rousso’s detainment at the Houston airport enroute to participation at a conference at Texas A&M University offers a chilling reminder of the importance of rule of law and respect for the rights of not only our colleagues but all travelers to the United States. Because the issue is of vital importance to the ability of historians to do our work, which includes international scholarly conversation, the AHA Council has voted to make the letter an official statement of the Association.
The American Historical Association strongly condemns the executive order issued by President Donald J. Trump on January 27 purportedly “protecting the nation from foreign terrorist entry into the United States.” Historians look first to evidence: deaths from terrorism in the United States in the last fifteen years have come at the hands of native-born citizens and people from countries other than the seven singled out for exclusion in the order. Attention to evidence raises the question as to whether the order actually speaks to the dangers of foreign terrorism.
Last week a news story appeared in The Hill, a Capitol Hill newspaper with a strong reputation for accuracy, that the Trump administration is considering the elimination of the NEH, along with other cultural agencies. Normally the AHA would not send out an alert based on a single report in a single newspaper. It is clear, however, that the “blueprint” reported in The Hill indeed points to a threat to the very existence of the NEH.
By Lee White
On January 19 the federal government issued its final rule governing Institutional Review Boards, which “explicitly removes” oral history and journalism from the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. It was originally promulgated as the “Common Rule” in 1991. The historical community, collaborating through the National Coalition for History, has long argued that scholarly history projects should not be subject to standard IRB procedures since they are designed for the research practices of the sciences. The new IRB rule goes into effect January 19, 2018.
The AHA Council, at its January 5, 2017, meeting, approved the following statement: