Recent AHA advocacy has addressed three different issue areas: the suppression of LGBTQ+ history, harassment and intimidation at academic conferences, and the importance of an accurate historical perspective in ongoing litigation surrounding the right to an abortion.

AHA Sends Letter to Missouri Governor Urging Reinstatement of LGBTQ+ History Exhibition

On September 13, the AHA sent a letter to Missouri governor Mike Parson recommending “most emphatically” that he reconsider his “decision to remove the exhibition Making History: Kansas City and the Rise of Gay Rights from the Missouri State Museum.” “By excluding this high-quality, professionally researched and produced historical exhibition from the State Museum,” the AHA wrote, “you articulate a vision of the state that we hope you do not intend: that LGBTQ+ Americans are not worthy of recognition or inclusion in the state of Missouri.”

AHA Releases Statement on Threats to Academic Conferences

On September 14, the AHA released a statement condemning the harassment and intimidation of participants, organizers, and university sponsors of the virtual conference “Dismantling Global Hindutva: Multidisciplinary Perspectives.” “Conferences, both in person and across digital platforms, are critical to the exchange of ideas among historians and our colleagues in other disciplines,” the AHA wrote. “Disruptions to a conference represent an assault on the principle of academic freedom, and the AHA stands unequivocally with participants in this conference and its sponsors in their right to exchange ideas without fear of threats and intimidation.” As of November 18, 40 organizations have signed on to this statement.

AHA Signs Amicus Curiae Brief in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization

On September 20, the AHA, along with the Organization of American Historians, became a signatory to an amicus curiae brief in the Supreme Court case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. This brief, based on decades of study and research by professional historians, aims to provide an accurate historical perspective as the court considers the state of Mississippi’s challenge to a woman’s right to abortion, a right that was affirmed by the court in Roe v. Wade.