Trump Removes Members of Historical Advisory Committee Amid Bias Concerns, Sparks Debate

Former President Donald Trump recently dismissed all members of the Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation, a little-known but important panel that advises the State Department on compiling and publishing the official record of U.S. foreign policy. The mass termination was delivered via email in July by a White House liaison to the State Department.

The email, sent by Cate Dillon, read:

“On behalf of President Donald Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position on the Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation is terminated effective immediately.”

No specific reason was provided for the decision, but speculation quickly followed. Critics pointed to political bias among some of the committee members, suggesting their prior public statements may have influenced the decision. Among those dismissed was historian Timothy Naftali, a Canadian-American scholar known for his critical views of Trump. Naftali announced his removal on social media, prompting commentary across the political spectrum.

The advisory committee, formed under federal mandate, is tasked with guiding the Office of the Historian in publishing the Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series. This publication serves as the official documentary record of U.S. foreign policy and includes carefully selected, declassified documents that accurately reflect historical events. Its role is not political—it is about preserving transparency and historical accuracy in U.S. diplomacy.

Despite that mission, some former members were criticized for making overtly political remarks while serving on the nonpartisan panel. James Goldgeier, the committee’s chairman and a professor at American University, had previously shared pointed opinions on social media about Trump’s leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic and 2020 civil unrest.

In a July 2020 post, Goldgeier wrote:

“It wasn’t enough for Trump to kill Americans through his incompetence and disinterest in dealing with the pandemic. Now he’s got DHS attacking peaceful Americans to distract from his failure to care about the pandemic.”

Goldgeier, in an interview with the Washington Post, said the committee was currently reviewing historical documents from the Reagan administration—far removed from current events. He argued that the group’s work is purely retrospective and unrelated to any sitting president.

“Right now, the office is still trying to get volumes out from the Reagan era,” he explained. “There’s no work that’s being done here regarding the current administration.”

He also raised concerns about the legality of the dismissals, pointing out that the committee is a congressionally mandated body. According to Goldgeier, the abrupt termination suggests a lack of understanding about the committee’s role and oversight requirements.

“It just seems to me like they just got a list from all the agencies of similar committees,” he said. “I can’t imagine they looked much into what any of the particular ones did.”

Despite the controversy, a senior official at the State Department clarified that there are no plans to dissolve the committee altogether. Instead, the Trump team reportedly intends to refill the positions with appointees they view as less politically biased and more aligned with the committee’s original mission.

This development comes as Trump continues to gain ground in public opinion polls. Following months of media scrutiny and legal challenges, his approval ratings appear to be climbing, according to multiple recent surveys.

In April, a national poll conducted by InsiderAdvantage and Trafalgar Group found Trump narrowly ahead in approval, with 46% of likely voters supporting his performance and 44% disapproving. However, that margin grew significantly by early summer.

By late May and early June, Trafalgar reported a sharp rise in support for Trump. In that poll, 54% of likely voters said they either approved or strongly approved of his performance. The number who disapproved fell to 46%, representing an 8-point shift. Notably, the survey included slightly more Democratic voters than Republicans, indicating that support may be growing even among more moderate or crossover voters.

A separate tracker from Rasmussen Reports showed similar results. As of June 2, Trump’s approval rating stood at 53%, just a few points shy of where it was during his first days in office in 2017.

While the committee shake-up has raised alarms among some historians and transparency advocates, Trump’s supporters argue that it reflects a necessary correction against perceived ideological imbalance in government institutions.

As the 2024 election approaches, moves like these are likely to spark continued debate over partisanship, historical recordkeeping, and the influence of politics in supposedly nonpartisan federal bodies.