Illustration by Uy Pham

So much remains unknown as we cascade into March still adjusting to what could change in our lives as Trump’s presidency takes hold. While some things are entirely too tangible, such as the discontinuation of affirmative action and the ongoing redefining of U.S. citizenship, what remains up in the air is the potential impact that new policies can have on artists.

While attending a private arts university like the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, it can seem like the arts have all the resources and funding in the world. Yet, federal funding for the arts has encompassed only 0.004% of the federal budget. In a 2020 budget proposal during his first term as president of the United States, Trump intended to halt arts endowment funding by terminating the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, despite bipartisan support for the programs. This agenda is informed by the goal of eliminating “wasteful” expenses.

The initial proposal was unsuccessful, but at the start of Trump’s second term on Wednesday, Jan. 23, the NEA Chair, Maria Rosario Jackson, suddenly resigned. In her resignation letter Jackson does not insinuate that the new administration is responsible; instead she celebrates the achievements of the NEA and stresses the importance of the arts.

On inauguration day a few days earlier, Trump dissolved the President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities. As reported by the New York Times, the website for the committee was removed and no commotion was made by the White House as it hid behind many other executive orders.

The committee was made up of artists and academics to advise on cultural policy. The committee began in 1982 under President Ronald Reagan as a non-partisan group tasked with creating arts programs and providing funding. In 2017, multiple committee members resigned in disagreement with Trump’s spending and support for hate groups. During President Joe Biden’s term in 2022, the committee was reinstated.

On Jan. 27, a freeze on all federal funding was ordered, including grants, loans, and financial assistance programs. The plan was swiftly rescinded on Jan. 29 by U.S. District Judge Loren L. AliKhan and Judge John McConnell. Despite that quick turnaround, many other facets of higher education still seem to be up in the air.

Federally funded institutions are some of the first targets affected by policy change. History and art museums, like the National Museum of African American History and Culture, are federally funded. As Trump enacts federal policy, these institutions, among many others, are immediately impacted.

With the elimination of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs, executed on inauguration day, companies and institutions have already begun to discard DEI values — and employees.

The impact of DEI’s removal on arts institutions is not at the forefront for many, but it’s still striking, especially as, due to their federal funding, institutions including the Smithsonian and National Gallery of Art have had to freeze hiring and close down their DEI offices. Simultaneously, these institutions have purged their websites and messaging to remove any DEI language.

DEI’s ban also threatens private federally funded universities with DEI values utilizing endowments of up to $1 billion or more. This is pressing for SAIC, as a small portion of funding for the school is derived federally, represented in federal grants, loans, and work study. (The greater portion of private funding is in endowment for the school and museum, which was $1.55 billion at the end of 2024, with $420 million being allocated to the school.)

“Our current understanding is that many of the proposed orders have an outsized impact on public schools and institutions that receive significant federal funding. While that is not the case with SAIC, as policies evolve, we will continue to evaluate how we navigate any changes, considering the implications of federal and state laws, as well as local ordinances that may affect our School,” said Jiseon Lee Isbara, SAIC President, in an email sent to the SAIC community on Feb. 20.

The lack of assuredness in what orders will and will not be made is not stopping people who work at DEI-focused artist spaces in Chicago from thinking about their next steps.

“No policy shift will deter us from this purpose. If anything, we are more determined than ever to amplify the voices of artists whose perspectives have historically been marginalized. In these uncertain times, we will work even harder to foster an inclusive, supportive, and courageous artistic community,” said Beate Minkovski, co-founder and member of the board of directors for Woman Made Gallery.

The art discussion is also incomplete without looking at spaces amplifying the history and voices of those outside of the U.S.

Carlos Bossard, director of programs and museum practice at the Haitian American Museum of Chicago, stressed that their institution has always supported and uplifted Haitian people.

“Through programs, in-person and virtual exhibitions, the museum will continue to provide opportunities and space for Haitian and non-Haitian artists to grow, thrive and be seen,” said Bossard.

HAMOC also participates in Chicago’s immigration programs: Legal Protection Fund and Illinois Access To Justice. HAMOC maintains faith in these programs and is looking on the bright side.

“A positive change that has happened recently is that more organizations, outside of Chicago, are reaching out to the museum to provide its Know Your Rights presentation. Our team is working hard to provide these presentations at various locations and virtually,” said Bossard.

Through any changes, the best way to support non-profit art spaces like Woman Made Gallery and HAMOC is through donation, sponsorship, and collaboration.

It’s hard to see the big picture of the next four years right now. The news is confusing, and often reliant on hearsay. While many of Trump’s policies have taken swift action, many more have not. One thing that seems certain is that artists will see an increase in their material costs.

The rollout of high import tariffs and retaliation from them has an impact on more than just eggs. What may not initially be apparent is the cost that tariffs will have on artists and art dealers. Raised tariffs on Canada have led to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau enlisting high tariffs on paper products and apparel. Artists may struggle with higher pricing on paper, textiles, staples and more, inhibiting printmakers, painters, artists in fibers and garment construction, as well as artists looking to create installations. Artists, their dealers, and art galleries may also face difficulty when importing work from artists living in Canada or Mexico. This is in addition to the already steep tariff on imports from China, of which 7.5% is on art and antiquities.

Artists’ resources and comforts seem to be vanishing, one by one. But all hope should not be lost. Institutions, organizations, and artists are continuously making an effort to build community, create, and preserve the right to exist.