Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Did Obama repeal the smith mundt act?
Executive Summary
The claim that "Obama repealed the Smith‑Mundt Act" is false: the statutory change commonly referenced is the Smith‑Mundt Modernization Act passed by Congress in 2013 during the Obama administration, which amended the original 1948 Smith‑Mundt law to allow certain federally produced information to be made available domestically; it was not a unilateral repeal by President Obama and remains the subject of new repeal attempts in Congress [1] [2] [3]. Recent 2025 legislative activity shows Representative Thomas Massie introduced HR 5704 to repeal the 2013 modernization and restore limits on domestic dissemination, confirming ongoing Congressional debate rather than an executive repeal [4] [2].
1. Who actually changed Smith‑Mundt — Congress, not the President, and why that matters!
Legislative records and contemporary accounts show the change commonly labeled as the "Smith‑Mundt Modernization" originated in Congress in 2013 and was enacted into law through regular legislative processes rather than by executive order or a presidential repeal. The 2012–2013 legislative efforts aimed to update the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948, modifying restrictions so that materials produced for foreign audiences could be more readily accessible domestically; this legislative action occurred while Barack Obama was president, but legal authority rests with Congress, not a unilateral presidential repeal [1] [5]. Framing the change as an "Obama repeal" misattributes the constitutional roles and obscures ongoing Congressional responsibility for statutory law.
2. What the 2013 modernization actually did — clarified but contested!
The Smith‑Mundt Modernization Act of 2013 amended prior statute to permit the domestic dissemination of certain materials produced by U.S. public diplomacy and information programs, shifting the practical boundaries of what agencies like the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors could circulate within the United States. Sources reiterate that the 2013 law authorized domestic access to federally funded information intended primarily for foreign audiences rather than constituting an outright repeal of the original statute in form or name; critics argue this change allowed government-funded messaging to reach American audiences in ways previously restricted, while supporters framed it as transparency and modernization [6] [1].
3. New 2025 efforts show the controversy is far from settled!
Representative Thomas Massie introduced HR 5704 in October 2025 seeking to repeal the 2013 Modernization Act and reinstate prohibitions on domestic dissemination of government-produced propaganda. Press materials and congressional entries from October 8, 2025 document Massie’s rationale—concern over domestic government influence and a desire to restore prior limitations—and show that the issue remains a legislative question, not a settled executive action [3] [4] [2]. The introduction of HR 5704 underscores ongoing political disagreement about the appropriate boundary between transparency and protection from government messaging domestically.
4. Where the misinformation narrative about "Obama repealed it" likely comes from
Contemporary summaries and advocacy materials often conflate the timing of the 2013 statutory change with the sitting president, producing the shorthand "Obama changed Smith‑Mundt" that can be misread as a presidential repeal. Multiple analyses emphasize there is no evidence that President Obama unilaterally repealed the Smith‑Mundt Act; the legislative record points to congressional action and subsequent debate over its effects, which opponents now seek to reverse through new bills like HR 5704 [2] [3] [6]. This conflation benefits narratives seeking to pin responsibility on a single political figure rather than on the legislative process itself.
5. How proponents and opponents frame the stakes — transparency vs. domestic protection!
Supporters of the 2013 modernization framed the change as a necessary update to allow U.S. public diplomacy outputs—intended for foreign publics—to be accessible domestically for transparency, research, and journalistic oversight, an argument found in legislative history and contemporaneous commentary [1]. Opponents, including Representative Massie and allied advocates in 2025, frame the modernization as enabling domestic propaganda and seek to restore a stricter prohibition to protect American audiences; HR 5704’s introduction explicitly advances that concern and highlights a partisan and civil‑liberties debate over government speech inside the United States [2] [6].
6. Bottom line for the claim and next developments to watch
The factual bottom line is clear: Obama did not repeal the Smith‑Mundt Act; Congress amended it in 2013 through the Smith‑Mundt Modernization Act, and lawmakers in 2025 are pursuing legislative reversal via HR 5704. Observers should watch Congressional action on HR 5704 and accompanying floor debate and committee records for the definitive statutory outcome, while noting messaging from both proponents and opponents will seek to frame the change in politically resonant terms [3] [4] [2].