FOIA Filed Seeking Records on Trump-Ordered Dismissal of Smithsonian Official, Kim Sajet & Board of Regent's Meeting
'It is important that the steps we take ensure a transparent, inclusive and thorough process.'— Lonnie Bunch III, Smithsonian Secretary, June 22, 2022 www.si.edu
WASHINGTON, DC, UNITED STATES, July 7, 2025 / EINPresswire.com / -- Artist, author, and free speech activist Julian Marcus Raven, a long-time litigant in matters involving the Smithsonian Institution, filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request today seeking internal communications, board deliberations, and government correspondence regarding the high-profile resignation of Kim Sajet, former director of the National Portrait Gallery.
The FOIA request, sent to the Smithsonian Institution's Office of General Counsel, senior counsel Jennifer B. McIntyre, requests records from 2016 through 2025 and covers topics including President Donald J. Trump's attempts to remove Sajet, internal deliberations by Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III, and email communications involving Smithsonian leadership and the Board of Regents—including Chief Justice John Roberts, who serves as Smithsonian Chancellor.
The FOIA was also copied to Lindsey Halligan, Ed Martin at the (DOJ), as well as other Smithsonian Secretary Bunch III, Smithsonian officials and members of the media. The request includes requests for documentation involving Raven's own artwork and lawsuits, including his case Raven v. Sajet, No. 17-cv-01240 (TNM).
The FOIA request targets several interconnected themes:
Communications regarding President Trump's removal of Kim Sajet, which occurred in May of 2025, followed by the Board of Regents' silence.
Secretary Bunch's and other officials' internal handling of the situation, including correspondence with Sajet, Deputy Secretary Richard Kurin, and others.
Discussion of Julian Raven and his previously rejected portrait of Donald Trump, a painting that has figured prominently in earlier litigation.
In light of Raven v. Sajet, the FOIA cites Judge Trevor McFadden's 2018 ruling that the Smithsonian Institution is 'government through and through,' thereby binding it to constitutional principles and transparency standards applicable to federal agencies (Case No. 17-cv-1240, U.S. District Court, D.D.C.).
Background and Public Interest
The request comes in the wake of a series of politically charged events involving the Smithsonian Institution:
On January 20, 2025, Donald Trump was inaugurated to a second non-consecutive term as President of the United States.
In February 2025, Trump publicly criticized the Smithsonian, citing 'ideological bias' and diversity-related initiatives.
In May 2025, Trump announced the removal of Kim Sajet from her position as Director of the National Portrait Gallery, calling her 'highly partisan.'
Despite the move, the Board of Regents and its Secretary Lonnie Bunch III in a closed session, declared they he and they are alone responsible for hiring and firing.
The same week Kim Sajet tendered her resignation on June 13th, 2025.
Raven, in response, on June filed an emergency petition on June 20th for rehearing at the U.S. Supreme Court regarding his formerly denied petition for cert that requested clarification on the legal entity status of the Smithsonian Institution as he pursued the vindication of his 1st Amendment free-speech rights.
The situation has prompted renewed media coverage from outlets including The Washington Post, ABC News, The Raw Story, The Guardian, and The Week, where Raven has been mentioned for his legal activism and the controversial portrait that was never accepted by the National Portrait Gallery.
Legal, Policy, and Ethical Implications
The FOIA request may shine light on lingering questions about:
The Smithsonian Institution's legal entity status
How $700 Million of tax payer appropriations influence a Smithsonian FOIA request
Whether the Board of Regents took formal action or gave informal advice regarding Sajet's status after the President's directive.
The extent of political activity and advocacy within the Smithsonian leadership.
Next Steps and Public Access to Board of Regent's meetings that for now are closed to the public
A full copy of the FOIA request is available upon request or can. be seen at www.smithsoninstitution.com/litigation
Raven has indicated that he is prepared to pursue litigation under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) if the Smithsonian fails to respond
Julian Raven
Julian Raven Artist
email us here
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content 'as is' without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This Viral Debate Clip Highlights A Scary Reality About Today's Conservatives
A viral clip from a debate between political commentator and journalist Mehdi Hasan and a self-proclaimed fascist is bringing to light some troubling realities about the conservative movement and the general level of public discourse today. Hasan appeared in the latest episode of Jubilee's 'Surrounded' series titled '1 Progressive vs 20 Far-Right Conservatives,' during which the former MSNBC host at one point debated a participant by the name of Connor. When asked to describe his ideal vision of the U.S., Connor referenced deporting people and then expressed a desire for a 'benevolent' autocrat who puts an end to American democracy. He also insisted that he would not be harmed by such a dictator and started to quote Nazi theorist Carl Schmitt, leading Hasan to ask if he was a fan of the Nazis. 'We may have to rename this show because you're a little bit more than a far-right Republican.'@mehdirhasan called out a self-proclaimed 'fascist' on the show 'Surrounded' where he debated 20 far-right Republicans. — Zeteo (@zeteo_news) July 20, 2025 'I frankly don't care about being called a Nazi at all,' Connor responded, later adding, 'Well, they persecuted the church a little bit. I'm not a fan of that.' Asked about Nazi persecution of Jews, he said, 'I certainly don't support anyone's human dignity being assaulted.' And when Hasan suggested that his views make him a fascist, he proudly replied, 'Yeah, I am.' This particular exchange highlights a number of disturbing aspects of the modern far-right movement, particularly the extremist vision of government and dangerous delusions about how such a system would impact people. 'I don't think that it is terribly rational to believe that one couldn't be harmed by a benevolent dictator, should one rise to take power,' Jacob Neiheisel, associate professor of political science at the University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences, told HuffPost. 'Even 'benevolent' dictators have rarely remained so throughout their tenure in office and have a track record of hurting even those who are closest to them.' When Connor shared his vision of government under a 'benevolent' autocrat, he stated, 'I'm not going to be a part of the group that he kills.' But this viewpoint is particularly misguided and dangerous, in addition to callous. 'Excessive executive power is always dangerous because of the potential for capriciousness,' said Todd Belt, professor and political management program director at The Graduate School of Political Management at The George Washington University. 'The autocrat who is friendly to you one day may not be the next. Also, power corrupts.' With this in mind, Neiheisel emphasized the value of a critical and engaged citizenry. 'I would also say that a healthy distrust of power is, on balance, a positive orientation to have in a democratic public,' he said. To maintain this kind of critical thinking and healthy distrust, however, the public must be educated and informed about historic events and politics. 'I think it is terrifying that fascism seems to be making a comeback among some young people who are terribly misinformed about what awful, immoral, murderous regimes they were,' said John Jost, a professor of psychology and politics at New York University. 'This guy seems to think that Francisco Franco was a good Catholic guy, but he is either completely clueless or in massive ideological denial. Even the slightest bit of research reveals that Franco killed much more than 100,000 innocent people, and it took many decades for the Spanish people to get over it, if indeed they have.' Jost published a paper in September titled 'Both-Sideology Endangers Democracy and Social Science' ― in which he points to evidence that 'false, misleading, and poor-quality information is more likely to populate conservative-rightist than liberal-leftist media ecosystems.' Thus, misleading and incorrect information about dictators like Franco can more easily spread and give rise to troubling views on government. 'The kind of rhetoric on display from the person Hasan was questioning appears to have become more prevalent on the right in recent years,' Neiheisel said. 'Although he doesn't say as much, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the individual in the clip is motivated by a desire to see some flavor of Christian dominion or theonomy come into practice in the United States.' He added that many others have come to support autocratic rule without a religious motivation ― as seen with influential far-right blogger Curtis Yarvin's argument for an American monarchy. 'I think that pro-fascist guy's comment about having a benevolent dictator speaks to a bit of a larger phenomenon that's happening in the United States where some portion of the electorate hungers for a strongman,' said Matt Dallek, a political historian and professor at The Graduate School of Political Management at The George Washington University. He pointed to a far-right vision of an all-powerful figure who expels immigrants, fosters a more white and native-born population, and unleashes law enforcement to go after alleged bad actors like 'the corrupt evil Deep State' with Democrats and 'Never Trumpers' and whoever the enemy of the moment is. 'That sentiment has become increasingly mainstream over the past few years ― that if you are a citizen, you're native born, you're white, you're a man and you have resources, then the authoritarian forces that this benevolent dictator will unleash will only target the bad guys, not you,' Dallek said. This delusional viewpoint in service of a racist, extremist and even murderous vision for the future suggests public discourse might be reaching new lows ― which begs the question of whether these kinds of 'debates' involving extremists are in any way helpful or productive for the participants, viewers or society at large. 'I'm not sure how helpful these types of debates are,' Neiheisel said. 'The only possible way in which the exchange between Hasan and Connor could be seen as a normative good from my perspective is that it might showcase that there actually are people who believe what Connor professes to believe about what government ought to look like. Acknowledging that there are those who would turn the country into more of an autocratic state is the first step en route to understanding why this impulse exists.' Belt noted that rather than a censoring or 'cancelling' approach, the 'Surrounded' debate setup takes the position of 'counterspeech' ― responding directly to harmful or offensive speech and countering it with more speech. 'While this approach aligns with constitutional values theoretically, I think that in practice it does not achieve the thoughtfulness of dialogue implicit in the counterspeech doctrine,' he said. 'The incessant interruptions make the video look more like a game of who can score the most points by making the other look as radical as fast as they can, and that's not really thoughtful dialogue. I think this video appeals to audiences who are looking for someone to take the other side 'down a peg' ― there's a real schadenfreude appeal to this type of video.' He added that progressives disillusioned with the Democratic Party's 'milquetoast' response to Trump's second term might find particular satisfaction in these kinds of viral clips and seeing someone take their arguments more forcefully to the other side. 'On one hand, the old Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis shared the idea that 'sunlight is the best disinfectant,' and typically those who believe in free speech believe you counter bad speech with good speech,' Dallek said. 'So I understand the impulse of taking on someone with really hateful, horrific views, and trying to expose that person for holding those extremist positions.' On the other hand, he believes it is 'a little bit nuts' to platform someone who is a self-proclaimed fascist and seemingly refuses to condemn Hitler and the Holocaust. Sure, this choice might draw attention and traffic to your clip and to your platform, but at what cost to humanity? (For his part, Hasan has said the producers did not communicate the extreme nature of the conservative participants' views to him ahead of his appearance.) 'I don't think much, if anything, can be gained by providing a platform and legitimizing such extreme, repugnant views via a debate with someone who is so far out because you're helping put these horrific ideas ― which have mostly been confined to the fringe since World War II ― into the mainstream,' Dallek said. 'And in the age of the internet and social media, some people will listen to others who express hateful or conspiratorial rhetoric, and they will act on these ideas in violent ways. So it's really kind of perilous and a way of further debasing a public discourse that has already been debased quite dramatically.' He emphasized that he has a lot of respect for nonprofits, civic organizations and individuals who attempt to bridge divides in the United States by having conversations with right-wing Trump supporters in which they seek to listen and understand why people believe systems are rigged or corrupt. 'I think that kind of dialogue can be productive and is important, but it's very different from what seems to me to be an almost Jerry Springer-esque pie-throwing contest with a self-described fascist,' Dallek noted. 'That's a bad idea if you want to have a serious conversation about the divisions in the U.S. The country is awash in hateful, dehumanizing rhetoric, and these ideas have become more mainstream. Platforming a self-described fascist only serves to further that process.' Related... Former MSNBC Host's Reaction To Right-Winger Calling Self A 'Fascist' Goes Viral Trump Called MAGA Supporters 'Stupid' — But Do They Even Care? Experts Weigh In. Trump Leveled A Baffling Threat At Rosie O'Donnell — Experts Explain Why It's Truly Terrifying
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lawler won't run for New York governor; Stefanik plans to announce after November election
Jul. 23—Rep. Mike R. Lawler will not run for governor of New York next year, clearing the way for Rep. Elise M. Stefanik to potentially clinch the Republican nomination without a primary. After months of teasing a potential run, previously pledging to announce a decision in June that did not come on time, Lawler announced on Wednesday morning that he wouldn't be seeking higher office next year and would instead run for reelection in his Hudson Valley swing district. "I've decided that the right thing to do for me, my family and my district is to run for re-election," he told the Fox network. That clears the way for his leading opposition for the GOP nomination — Stefanik. Lawler has previously said he would not push the party into a primary, which would force the two candidates to compete for conservative votes, commit to conservative positions and spend significant sums of money before starting the real competition against the Democratic candidate. In a statement shortly after Lawler's announcement went wide, Stefanik lauded Lawler as an "effective and hardworking Republican for New York's 17th Congressional district" and said she would announce her own plans once this year's general election is over. "I am focused on supporting strong Republican local and county candidates on the ballot this November to lay the groundwork with a strong team for next year," she said. "I will make a final decision and announcement after this year's November election which we are all focused on." Stefanik has been similarly teasing a potential run for the seat, but she has gained more traction than Lawler. While the Hudson Valley congressman has been relatively quiet in his positioning, meeting behind closed doors with Republicans and only infrequently criticizing Democratic Gov. Kathleen C. Hochul, Stefanik has had much higher profile visits and hosted a press conference after meeting with the state Republican delegation earlier this year. Stefanik has criticized Hochul far more frequently than her supposed competition for reelection in the 21st District. And in perhaps the most significant sign that Lawler wouldn't be running for governor, President Donald J. Trump endorsed him for reelection to the House earlier this year. Lawler met with Trump again last week ahead of his announcement. Nassau County Executive Bruce R. Blakeman has also considered a run for governor, but has far less name recognition and fundraising prowess than Stefanik does. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party is headed into a likely primary between Hochul and her Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado. In early polling, it appears Hochul is likely to ignore Delgado's challenge and forge ahead to a victory. Hochul and her team seemed to revel in the news Wednesday. "Of course he doesn't have the spine to face me," Hochul said on X, formerly Twitter. In a separate post, Hochul showed an image of a Milk Bone dog treat box, adorned with a sticky note with Lawler's name on it. "A treat for Donald Trump's good boy," the post reads.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senator says U.S. tariffs from Trump White House damaging for Washington state
Opponents from Washington state of U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff threats against Canada are vowing to fight, saying the ongoing trade war has delivered a heavy blow to American border communities. In a conference call led by Democrat U.S. Senator Patty Murray that included British Columbia Premier David Eby, Murray said regions such as Whatcom County bordering Canada get about 12 per cent of taxable retail income from Canadian consumers. Murray said the drop in Canadian tourists visiting her state has also resulted in economic uncertainty among ferry operators and in Point Roberts, where residents cannot access the U.S. mainland without travelling through Canada. Eby said it is difficult to continue asking British Columbians to keep their money in Canada but the U.S. boycotts are necessary in the trade war despite circumstances being "miserable" on both sides of the border. Earlier this week, Eby responded to statements by the U.S. Ambassador to Canada who called Canadians mean and nasty over their travel and alcohol boycott, saying Canadians would be "proud" to be considered mean for standing up for their sovereignty. Edmund Schweitzer, founder of Washington-based digital device maker Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, said during the conference call that his company is predicting the tariffs will cost it US$100 million in "unanticipated federal taxes." Schweitzer said that means each of the 7,000 employees who co-own the company will take a financial hit of US$14,000 from the tariffs. "President Trump seems to have created the 51st state that he was talking about, which is the great state of uncertainty," he said Wednesday. "And this is affecting all of us." Murray said she is working in the U.S. Congress to bring Democrats and Republicans to join in the fight to wrestle back the power to set tariffs from the White House and urges other Americans to join the cause. "Who is responsible for this, and we all need to remember this, is the president of the United States who started this," Murray said. "We are raising our voices to say, 'Enough is enough … stop this." B.C. is among several Canadian provinces that banned the sale of U.S. alcohol from government-run stores after the trade war began, and industry groups say such sales in Canada have fallen sharply in March and April. Statistics Canada figures show the number of Canadians returning home by car from south of the border fell to just over 33 per cent in June compared with the same period last year, and return trips by air fell to just over 22 per cent during the same period. "No one wants this," Murray said of the falling numbers and economic uncertainty. "We did not ask for this. It's been imposed on us. And I think that the premier is making it clear he has to make it painful for the United States. "That doesn't change our relationship with British Columbia. We've always been friends, allies. We have had challenges in the past, but we talk to each other. We work through it, and that's what we both want at the end of this." This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 23, 2025. Chuck Chiang, The Canadian Press Sign in to access your portfolio
