Texas Lawmakers Push for Space Shuttle Discovery’s Relocation

The ongoing dispute over the future of the space shuttle Discovery has escalated, drawing the attention of the Department of Justice (DOJ). Texas Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz, along with Texas Representative Randy Weber, are urging the DOJ to investigate the Smithsonian Institution for alleged violations of the Anti-Lobbying Act. Their request comes as part of a broader initiative to relocate the shuttle from its current home at the Smithsonian’s Udvar-Hazy Center in Virginia to Houston, Texas, where NASA’s Johnson Space Center is located.

In a letter dated October 22, 2023, the lawmakers claim that the Smithsonian has improperly utilized federal funds to oppose the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA), signed by former President Donald Trump. This legislation mandates the transfer of Discovery to Houston. The letter accuses the Smithsonian of lobbying Congress, working with journalists, and circulating inflated estimates regarding the costs associated with the shuttle’s relocation.

The conflict dates back to the “Bring the Space Shuttle Home Act,” introduced in April 2023, which initially failed in committee but was later integrated into the OBBBA. While the new language does not explicitly mention Discovery, it directs the transfer of a human-flown “space vehicle” to a NASA center involved in the Commercial Crew Program. The bill, signed on July 4, 2023, set a deadline for NASA’s administrator to select a vehicle, allowing for an 18-month window for its relocation to Houston.

Texas lawmakers describe Houston as “the cornerstone of America’s human space exploration program,” expressing their eagerness to welcome Discovery. However, the Smithsonian contends that it holds full ownership rights to the shuttle, raising concerns about the legal implications of removing an artifact from its national collection and the logistical challenges of transporting the 122-foot-long (37-meter) orbiter across the country.

In a letter to Congress earlier this month, the Smithsonian indicated that both it and NASA have concluded that relocating Discovery would necessitate partial disassembly of the shuttle, with estimated costs ranging from $120 million to $150 million. This figure significantly exceeds the $85 million allocated in the OBBBA, which has yet to be appropriated. Furthermore, this estimate does not account for the expenses associated with constructing a new facility in Houston for the shuttle’s display.

The Smithsonian was designated as Discovery’s permanent home over a decade ago. Following a nationwide competition to determine the final resting places for the retired space shuttle fleet in 2011, the Smithsonian, along with other institutions, submitted proposals. Ultimately, Discovery was awarded to the Smithsonian, while Atlantis went to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida and Endeavour was assigned to the California Science Center. The Smithsonian asserts that in 2012, NASA transferred “all rights, title, interest and ownership” of Discovery to the museum, reinforcing its responsibility for the shuttle’s long-term stewardship.

Texas lawmakers have dismissed the Smithsonian’s cost estimates and its claim of ownership. In their letter to the DOJ, they reference “industry experts” who suggest that the true cost of relocating Discovery is significantly lower than the Smithsonian’s projections, and they contest the assertion that the institution is not a government entity. Historically, the Smithsonian is recognized as a “trust instrumentality,” operating outside the traditional federal agency structure, yet created by Congress to serve a public purpose.

Cornyn, Cruz, and Weber’s letter to the DOJ requests an investigation into whether Smithsonian personnel or funds have been used to obstruct the implementation of the law. They argue that these activities raise “significant concerns under the Anti-Lobbying Act,” which prohibits the use of federal funds for lobbying efforts aimed at influencing Congress regarding legislation.

The lawmakers also criticize the Smithsonian’s leadership and its exhibits, suggesting that they reflect a “politicized agenda” that undermines the institution’s responsibilities as a federal entity. This includes the museum’s portrayal of slavery in American history and its plans to include transgender women in the upcoming American Women’s History Museum.

Joe Stief, founder of the independent group KeeptheShuttle.org, which opposes the relocation, characterized the lawmakers’ actions as an attempt to silence the Smithsonian. He noted that their complaint mirrors an earlier appeal made to Chief Justice John Roberts, Chancellor of the Smithsonian’s Board of Regents, which received no public response.

The lawmakers’ letter highlights multiple court decisions that recognize the Smithsonian as a federal government entity, stating that it is “subject to federal law and entitled to government immunities.” This raises questions about whether the Smithsonian’s communications with Congress could be classified as lobbying, as per the lawmakers’ allegations.

Guidance from the DOJ and the Government Accountability Office suggests that direct communications between federal entities and Congress about official matters are not considered lobbying, as the law primarily targets public-pressure campaigns rather than internal agency correspondence.

The outcome of a potential DOJ review into this matter remains uncertain, as it could test the applicability of the Anti-Lobbying Act to hybrid institutions like the Smithsonian, which rely on a combination of federal funding and trust income. As of now, the Smithsonian has not commented on the lawmakers’ letter and is unable to provide a response due to the ongoing government shutdown.