CNN’s Victor Blackwell had two crazy takes as he hosted Saturday’s First of All. First, he claimed that the National Portrait Gallery not featuring a painting of a black, female transgender Statue of Liberty was some great affront to history, and secondly, he lamented that the Department of Agriculture is ending race-based farm grants.
Blackwell’s lament about the painting was in the context of the Department of Homeland Security’s Instagram account posting a picture of the famous 1872 American Progress painting by John Gast:
Here is the Statue of Liberty, modeled after a black transgender woman. The piece is one of several in an exhibit called American Sublime. It was scheduled to make a stop at the National Portrait Gallery. That was until Amy Sherald says that the gallery told her that concerns had been raised internally by the Smithsonian. She explains that these concerns led to discussions about removing the work from the exhibition. And she says, while no single person is to blame, it’s clear that institutional fear, shaped by a broader climate of political hostility toward trans lives, played a role.
However, Blackwell also seemed to indicate the decision to remove the painting was Sherald’s, “A spokesperson from the Smithsonian says the museum had proposed including a video that would contextualize the painting, but Sherald ultimately decided to pull her work from the gallery entirely. Here’s what she said to NPR back in April. She seemed to see this coming. Not that it was hard for anybody to see.”
In that interview, Sherald uncorked a wild one, “We’re talking about erasure every day, and so now I feel like every portrait that I make, it’s a counter terrorist attack that has to counter, some kind of attack on American history and on black American history and on black Americans.”
After reading a quote from Trump official Lindsey Halligan defending the decision on the grounds the Statue of Liberty should not be used as “an abstract canvas for political expression,” Blackwell tied it all together by bringing back Gast’s work, “So let me get this straight. We’re not at liberty to reinterpret the Statue of Liberty. Remember that. But what these two pieces this week do seem to make clear: in this moment, art that is potentially offensive to one group can be overlooked. While another group can pick which parts of the American story are seen, represent real progress, and become heritage.”
A sarcastic Blackwell then teased his next segment, “Alright, if you’re worried about the impact of past discrimination, don’t worry. That’s been sufficiently handled, at least according to the USDA. And that’s why the department says it’s no longer giving special support to minority farmers. We’ll speak to a farmer about that next.”
After returning from commercials, Blackwell scoffed, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture says it will no longer provide support for minority farmers.”
Blackwell then introduced his guest, Asian American Farmers Alliance founder Mai Nguyen, and asked a question that he clearly had a desired answer for, “So, the USDA’s going to stop using this term ‘socially disadvantaged,’ which ends certain special grants for black, Asian, Native American, Hispanic farmers. They say, ‘We fixed the problems of the past.’ Have they fixed them?”
Nguyen thought the idea was hilarious, “Right. Yeah, I—what evidence do they have that discrimination is over? I would really love to see that. And also in this new rule, they do acknowledge that historic discrimination existed, and so I would also like to see what evidence they have that they’ve ended the lingering, ongoing effects of historic discrimination.”
Of course, having one law for some racial groups and another for a different group is wildly unconstitutional. The point of the 14th Amendment is that the solution to discrimination is simply to stop discriminating, not to discriminate against a different group.
Here is a transcript for the July 26 show:
CNN First of All with Victor Blackwell
7/26/2025
8:39 AM ET
VICTOR BLACKWELL: Here is the Statue of Liberty, modeled after a black transgender woman. The piece is one of several in an exhibit called American Sublime. It was scheduled to make a stop at the National Portrait Gallery. That was until Amy Sherald says that the gallery told her that concerns had been raised internally by the Smithsonian. She explains that these concerns led to discussions about removing the work from the exhibition. And she says, while no single person is to blame, it’s clear that institutional fear, shaped by a broader climate of political hostility toward trans lives, played a role.
A spokesperson from the Smithsonian says the museum had proposed including a video that would contextualize the painting, but Sherald ultimately decided to pull her work from the gallery entirely. Here’s what she said to NPR back in April. She seemed to see this coming. Not that it was hard for anybody to see.
AMY SHERALD: We’re talking about erasure every day, and so now I feel like every portrait that I make, it’s a counter terrorist attack that has to counter, some kind of attack on American history and on black American history and on black Americans.
BLACKWELL: So, the Trump White House has an official whose job is to root out what the administration calls improper ideology at the Smithsonian. Her name is Lindsey Halligan. She’s an attorney. And she sent this statement to the Washington Post. She says that “the Statue of Liberty is not an abstract canvas for political expression—it is a revered and solemn symbol of freedom, inspiration and national unity that defines the American spirit. Removal of this exhibit is a principled and necessary step toward restoring that purpose.”
So let me get this straight. We’re not at liberty to reinterpret the Statue of Liberty. Remember that. But what these two pieces this week do seem to make clear: in this moment, art that is potentially offensive to one group can be overlooked. While another group can pick which parts of the American story are seen, represent real progress, and become heritage.
Alright, if you’re worried about the impact of past discrimination, don’t worry. That’s been sufficiently handled, at least according to the USDA. And that’s why the department says it’s no longer giving special support to minority farmers. We’ll speak to a farmer about that next.
…
8:46 AM ET
BLACKWELL: The U.S. Department of Agriculture says it will no longer provide support for minority farmers. They claim past discrimination has been sufficiently handled. Mai Nguyen is with us now. A farmer in Sonoma County, California, and founder of the Asian American Farmers Alliance. Good to have you. So, the USDA’s going to stop using this term “socially disadvantaged,” which ends certain special grants for black, Asian, Native American, Hispanic farmers. They say, “We fixed the problems of the past.” Have they fixed them?
MAI NGUYEN: Right. Yeah, I—what evidence do they have that discrimination is over? I would really love to see that. And also in this new rule, they do acknowledge that historic discrimination existed, and so I would also like to see what evidence they have that they’ve ended the lingering, ongoing effects of historic discrimination.
