8 Americans Who Shaped History, With Legacies Still Debated

As the United States approaches its 250th anniversary on July 4, 2026, a new New York Times interactive feature examines eight Americans who undeniably shaped the nation’s history — but whose legacies remain deeply contested. Published as part of the newspaper’s “U.S.A. at 250” series, the piece highlights how the nation continues to grapple with differing interpretations of its most influential figures, from founding-era symbols to modern political leaders.

“America is and always has been an argument — it’s an experiment,” Yale historian David W. Blight told the Times, capturing the essence of a feature that consulted scholars across the country to identify figures whose contributions are inseparable from ongoing national debates over race, gender, political violence, and historical memory.

The Eight Figures

The feature spans approximately 250 years of American history, from the Revolutionary era to the modern Supreme Court. The eight figures — or in one case, a symbolic figure — each embody a different facet of America’s contested past.

The Minuteman (circa 1775) stands at the center of an enduring debate about when government becomes tyranny and when citizens are justified in taking up arms. The iconic statue in Concord, Massachusetts, has been claimed by Cold War militarists, 1960s right-wing militia groups, and modern anti-government movements. Historian Robert A. Gross notes the myth is “detached from social context and political organization” — the original minutemen were rooted in communal, well-organized local government, not individualistic liberty.

Charles Curtis (1860-1936), the first person of color to serve as U.S. Vice President, presents a paradox. Of white and Native (Kaw) ancestry, Curtis ascended to the vice presidency under Herbert Hoover without forsaking his Indigenous heritage, yet advanced assimilationist policies that many Native Americans regard as deeply harmful. He was the namesake of the Curtis Act, which weakened tribal governments and privatized Native lands. As Kiara M. Vigil of Amherst College put it: “A man who sometimes voted against the best interests of his fellow Indians also achieved a great deal at a time when the odds were against him.”

John Brown (1800-1859), the white abolitionist who used violence against slavery supporters in “Bleeding Kansas” and led the raid on Harpers Ferry, has been called “hero,” “fanatic,” and “zealot.” After the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, some asked whether Brown was America’s first domestic terrorist. In 2009, historian David S. Reynolds called for Brown to be pardoned for his “heroic effort to free four million enslaved blacks” — a pardon that never came.

Booker T. Washington (1856-1915), the prominent Black leader who advocated industrial education and material progress within Black communities while downplaying demands for full citizenship under Jim Crow, remains deeply contentious. Revered on the right by figures like Thomas Sowell and Clarence Thomas, Washington was criticized by W.E.B. Du Bois for giving the impression “the South is justified in its present attitude toward the Negro.” His 1895 “Atlanta Compromise” speech continues to resonate in contemporary debates over Black politics, voting rights, and affirmative action.

Madam C.J. Walker (1867-1919), the African American entrepreneur who built a hair care empire and became the first self-made female millionaire in the U.S., has been accused of promoting European beauty standards by popularizing hot combs to straighten hair. Walker defended her products as focused on hygiene and scalp health. “Let me correct the erroneous impression held by some that I claim to straighten hair,” she said in 1919. “I have always held myself out as a hair culturist. I grow hair.” Her legacy has been reassessed through the lens of women’s empowerment and Black entrepreneurship.

D.W. Griffith (1875-1948), the pioneering filmmaker whose 1915 epic “The Birth of a Nation” spurred the revival of the Ku Klux Klan, presents perhaps the starkest case of art versus morality. Long celebrated as cinema’s supreme technical innovator, Griffith’s racist content has become impossible to separate from its form. The article argues that time has worn away the importance of the art, but “what remains — what seems, alas, less obsolete — is the hate.”

Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016), the conservative activist who led the successful campaign to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s, finds her arguments resonating anew with today’s conservative women, from “tradwives” to Turning Point USA. She mobilized evangelical Christians, building the coalition that reshaped the Republican Party. The article notes the paradoxes: she exalted homemaking while running political campaigns with the help of a housekeeper.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1933-2020), the Supreme Court justice and feminist icon, left a legacy complicated by her decision not to retire when Democrats controlled the Senate. Her seat was filled by Amy Coney Barrett, who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade. Supporters argue it’s unfair to blame her — the court was already shifting right, and Hillary Clinton was expected to win in 2016. As journalist Nadine Epstein wrote: “I am quite sure that had Justice Ginsburg known the unexpected twist that history would take, she would have responded to Obama’s inquiry differently.”

A Nation’s Argument With Itself

The feature arrives at a moment of intense debate over the 250th anniversary itself. The Trump administration has moved forcefully to advance a triumphant interpretation of American history, creating the White House Task Force on Celebrating America’s 250th Birthday (Task Force 250) via executive order in January 2025. Critics, meanwhile, argue for a more nuanced, critical examination of the nation’s past.

The United States Semiquincentennial has become a flashpoint in the ongoing culture war over how American history should be taught and remembered. The NYT piece does not explicitly endorse either side but presents the contested nature of historical memory as a feature of American democracy itself.

What This Tells Us About America

Five of the eight figures are directly tied to debates about race, slavery, and Indigenous rights. Three represent different facets of women’s roles in American society. The Minuteman and John Brown both raise questions about when violence against government or injustice is justified.

By selecting figures whose legacies are actively contested — rather than universally celebrated founders like Washington or Jefferson — the article illustrates that historical figures are judged not only by their era but by ever-evolving contemporary moral standards. As the nation prepares to mark 250 years, the feature serves as a reminder that America’s history is not a settled story but an ongoing conversation.

“To study the history of the United States,” the article opens, “means confronting that its larger-than-life figures are measured not only against the era in which they lived, but also in the unrelenting, ever-fluid march of time.” New information crops up. Fresh moral concerns rise. Contemporary politics shape how we understand yesterday’s conflicts.

With just two weeks until the July 4 anniversary, the question of what America should celebrate — and what it should reckon with — has never been more pressing.