Controversy Surrounds Censorship of Artwork at History Colorado Center

In October 2025, a significant controversy arose surrounding an artwork commissioned for a museum exhibition focused on the Little Saigon neighborhood in Denver. The piece, created by local artist Madalyn Drewno, depicted a Vietnamese immigrant and her daughter, adorned with culturally significant elements such as chrysanthemums and Lunar New Year lanterns. However, the final version included politically charged imagery, including representations of individuals detained or deported by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and messages such as “Sudan Stands With Palestine.”

New York Times

Days before the exhibition's opening, the History Colorado Center, a state museum, decided to pull Drewno's artwork. The museum cited potential violations of the state's Fair Campaign Practices Act, which prohibits state agencies from influencing political campaigns. Joie Ha, the executive director of Colorado Asian Pacific United, the nonprofit that commissioned the artwork, communicated this decision to Drewno, highlighting that the artwork could expose the institution to legal risks. The artwork featured notable political figures, including Senator John Hickenlooper, Governor Jared Polis, and Senator Michael Bennet, with provocative imagery that included green dollar signs over Hickenlooper's eyes and the phrase “funds genocide” framing Bennet's face.

New York Times

The museum's rationale for removing the artwork has sparked outrage among free speech advocates, who argue that this action constitutes censorship. They contend that the decision undermines artistic expression and the role of art in political discourse. The History Colorado Center, however, maintains that their actions were in compliance with state law, which emphasizes terms like “contribution,” “donation,” and “expenditure” in its interpretation of the Fair Campaign Practices Act.

New York Times

Critics of the museum's decision have voiced concerns about the implications for artistic freedom and the potential chilling effect on future exhibitions. Free speech organizations have rallied in support of Drewno, asserting that the removal of the artwork represents a broader trend of censorship in public institutions. They argue that art should serve as a platform for political commentary and social justice issues, rather than being stifled by legal concerns.

New York Times

• “Exhibiting this piece could be considered a violation of that act and expose the institution to legal risk,” — Joie Ha, Executive Director of Colorado Asian Pacific United

New York Times

The fallout from this incident may lead to further discussions about the intersection of art, politics, and legal frameworks governing public institutions. Stakeholders are likely to engage in dialogues about how to balance artistic freedom with compliance to state laws, potentially influencing future exhibitions and policies at the History Colorado Center and similar institutions.

New York Times