Protecting Our History Act of 2026

(a) Judicial review. Any Institution, or any employee, contractor, officer, or advisory body of an Institution, subjected to retaliation, coercion, or interference for protected scholarly, curatorial, or educational activity in violation of this division may bring a civil action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to seek—

(1) declaratory relief;

(2) injunctive relief, including preliminary injunctive relief;

(3) mandamus; or

(4) such other relief as the court deems appropriate.

(b) Presumption of irreparable harm. In any action brought under subsection (a), a credible showing that an executive action threatens the content, programming, collections, or operations of an Institution shall create a rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm.

(c) Whistleblower protections. Federal whistleblower protections under chapter 23 of title 5, United States Code, are hereby extended to museum directors, curators, archivists, researchers, and advisory council members of any Institution who report violations of this division to Congress or any Inspector General.

(d) Inspector general oversight. The Inspector General of the Smithsonian Institution shall conduct an annual audit of any attempts to improperly influence or restrict the content, programming, or operations of any Smithsonian Institution unit and shall transmit the results of each audit to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate and the Committees on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

(e) Administrative discipline. Any Federal officer or employee found by the Inspector General or a court of competent jurisdiction to have knowingly directed, required, or prohibited the content of exhibitions, educational programming, or curatorial decisions in violation of this division shall be subject to administrative discipline, up to and including removal, consistent with Federal employment law.