Renowned Artist Kehinde Wiley Seeks to Repurchase Painting Following State Department Removal Over "Woke" Designation

By Anna Lee
Published: September 29, 2026

Main Facts

Renowned contemporary American artist Kehinde Wiley has officially requested to buy back his 2015 painting, Young Artists After Siamesas 1960, following its sudden and contentious removal from the United States Embassy in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. The artwork, which was commissioned and integrated into the embassy’s collection as part of the State Department’s Art in Embassies program, was taken down in August under directives from Trump-backed administration officials.

The decision to remove the painting was spearheaded by Leah Campos, the United States Ambassador to the Dominican Republic, and Erin Scavino, the head of the State Department’s Art in Embassies program. According to statements released by the agency, officials justified the removal by labeling the work "woke" and citing what they characterized as the artist’s "violent and racist words and depictions."

In response to the administration’s actions, Wiley sent a formal, direct letter to President Donald Trump on September 24, proposing to purchase the artwork back to return it to his personal custody. The letter, which was subsequently made public when Sean Kelly Gallery shared it on social media platforms, underscores Wiley’s deep personal and creative connection to the piece. Crafted following an extensive two-year research residency in the Dominican Republic, the painting was specifically designed to foster cultural exchange and highlight the talent of young local artists in Santo Domingo.

As the controversy continues to unfold, legal representatives for both the federal government and the artist are reportedly examining the regulatory frameworks governing the disposal and sale of federally owned artwork acquired through cultural diplomacy initiatives.

Chronology of Events

To fully understand the current standoff between Kehinde Wiley and the United States State Department, it is necessary to examine the timeline of the artwork’s creation, display, and subsequent politicization:

• 2013–2015 (The Creative Process): Kehinde Wiley embarks on an extensive research and studio initiative in the Dominican Republic. Spending two years studying the historical lineage of Dominican art and collaborating directly with young emerging artists in Santo Domingo, Wiley conceptualizes and creates Young Artists After Siamesas 1960 (2015). The piece is intended to bridge American and Caribbean artistic traditions.
• 2015–2024 (Embassy Installation): The painting is acquired and installed at the United States Embassy in Santo Domingo under the auspices of the State Department’s Art in Embassies program. For nearly a decade, the work hangs as a symbol of cultural diplomacy, representing contemporary American artistic achievement to international diplomats and local visitors.
• August 2026 (The Removal): Amid shifting political directives and a renewed focus on federally funded cultural assets by newly appointed administration officials, US Ambassador to the Dominican Republic Leah Campos and Art in Embassies program head Erin Scavino order the removal of Wiley’s painting. State Department officials publicly brand the work "woke" and accuse the artist of producing "violent and racist words and depictions."
• Late August 2026 (Initial Legal Inquiries): Following public inquiries, a State Department spokesperson reveals that elected officials and agency lawyers are actively reviewing legal options to determine whether government-owned art can be sold back to its creator.
• September 24, 2026 (Wiley’s Letter to the President): Kehinde Wiley formally dispatches a letter directly to President Donald Trump, offering to buy back the painting to salvage its intended cultural purpose.
• Late September 2026 (Public Disclosure): Sean Kelly Gallery, which has represented Wiley since 2010, publishes the contents of the letter on social media, drawing widespread attention from the global art community, media outlets, and free-expression advocates.

Supporting Data and Context: The Art and the Artist

Kehinde Wiley is widely recognized as one of the most significant and influential portrait painters of the 21st century. He achieved historic international acclaim in 2018 when he was commissioned by the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery to paint the official presidential portrait of Barack Obama, becoming the first African American artist to paint a presidential portrait for the institution. Known for his signature hyper-realistic style that juxtaposes contemporary Black figures against elaborate, highly decorative botanical and historical backdrops, Wiley’s work frequently engages with Western art history, power dynamics, and identity.

Young Artists After Siamesas 1960 holds a distinct place within Wiley’s oeuvre. Rather than being a studio piece created in isolation, the painting is deeply rooted in Caribbean art history. The title references the foundational Dominican modernist group Siamesas, and the composition reflects Wiley’s intensive engagement with the local Santo Domingo creative community.

The State Department’s Art in Embassies program, established in 1963 under the Kennedy administration, has historically functioned as a vital component of public diplomacy. Utilizing original works of art from American artists, the program curates exhibitions in over 200 diplomatic outposts worldwide. The initiative aims to project the cultural diversity, creativity, and democratic values of the United States to foreign nations. The targeting of Wiley’s painting represents a significant departure from traditional non-partisan curatorial practices, introducing domestic culture-war politics directly into international diplomatic spaces.

Official Responses and Public Statements

The dispute has generated intense reactions from all involved parties, shining a spotlight on the intersection of federal art collections and executive oversight.

In its August statements to cultural journalism outlets, the State Department defended the removal of the painting by pointing to executive priorities and alleging that Wiley’s public rhetoric and artistic output crossed boundaries into "violent and racist words and depictions." This rationale has been embraced by Trump-appointed officials like Ambassador Leah Campos and program director Erin Scavino, who have framed the curation of embassy walls as an extension of executive policy.

Conversely, Kehinde Wiley’s letter to President Trump adopts a measured yet firm tone, emphasizing the original collaborative spirit in which the work was conceived:

"If your administration has determined that it no longer wishes to display the work, I would like to ask for the opportunity to purchase it back," Wiley writes. "I created this painting for a particular place and with a particular purpose. I spent two years studying the work of Dominican artists and worked with young artists in Santo Domingo in making it."

Art institutions, legal scholars, and commercial galleries have closely monitored the situation. Sean Kelly Gallery’s public distribution of the letter has galvanized support from collectors and fellow artists, many of whom view the removal and subsequent labeling of the artwork as a dangerous precedent for government censorship and the ideological vetting of public art collections. As of press time, neither Wiley nor representatives from Sean Kelly Gallery have issued further comments beyond the published letter, while State Department attorneys continue to deliberate on the legal feasibility of a buyback transaction.

Broader Implications for Cultural Diplomacy and Free Expression

The controversy surrounding Kehinde Wiley’s painting reaches far beyond a single diplomatic outpost in the Dominican Republic, raising critical questions about the future of government-sponsored art, freedom of expression, and the politicization of cultural institutions.

1. The Politicization of Federal Art Programs

For decades, the Art in Embassies program operated under the assumption that artistic expression should transcend transient political administrations. Curatorial choices were traditionally guided by aesthetic merit, historical significance, and representation of America’s diverse cultural fabric. The intervention by political appointees such as Ambassador Leah Campos and Erin Scavino to purge works deemed "woke" signals a shift toward ideological compliance tests for federally owned art. This creates a challenging environment for curators and artists who must now consider whether their creations will be subjected to retrospective political audits based on shifting administrations.

2. Precedents for Censorship and Removal

The labeling of Wiley’s work as containing "violent and racist words and depictions" without a transparent, peer-reviewed curatorial defense establishes a troubling precedent. Critics and free-speech advocates argue that utilizing administrative power to remove and stigmatize contemporary art degrades the integrity of public diplomacy. When embassies—which serve as America’s cultural embassies abroad—begin censoring works based on partisan definitions of culture, the country’s projection of democratic values and open dialogue is severely undermined.

3. Legal and Ownership Complexities

The request to buy back a piece of government property opens a complex legal labyrinth. Federal acquisition guidelines, property disposal laws, and regulations governing gifts to the United States government strictly regulate how federal assets can be deaccessioned and sold. If the State Department ultimately permits Wiley to purchase the painting, it could create a legal pathway for other artists whose works face similar political targeting to reclaim their creations. Conversely, a refusal to sell could leave the artwork languishing indefinitely in government storage, effectively silencing the piece and denying both the artist and the public access to a significant cultural artifact.

As this story continues to develop, it serves as a stark reminder of the fragile relationship between art and state power, proving that the canvas remains a potent battleground for ideological debates in contemporary American life.