A fierce political tug-of-war has erupted over one of America’s most iconic space artifacts — the space shuttle Discovery. Once celebrated for its groundbreaking missions beyond Earth, Discovery now faces an uncertain future back on the ground. The Smithsonian Institution, which proudly houses the shuttle at its Udvar-Hazy Center in Virginia, is resisting efforts to relocate it to Houston, home to NASA’s Johnson Space Center.
The space shuttle Discovery, hailed as the “crown jewel” of the Smithsonian’s collection, sits in the James S. McDonnell Space Hangar, a centerpiece of American space history. But a directive emerging from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has reignited a heated debate: should Discovery remain at the Smithsonian, or be moved to Texas within 18 months, as mandated under President Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill”?
The push to “bring the shuttle home” began years ago, led by Texas Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz through their “Bring the Shuttle Home Act.” While their initial attempt faltered, the proposal found new life when its language was folded into Trump’s sweeping legislative package and signed into law on July 4.
However, recent correspondence between NASA, the Smithsonian, and Congress reveals the deep divisions this decision has caused. In a formal letter, the Smithsonian warned that transferring Discovery could require “significant disassembly,” a move that would “destroy its historical value.” The museum’s estimate for the relocation a staggering $120–$150 million far exceeds the $85 million authorized by the bill.
Joe Stief, organizer of KeepTheShuttle.org, expressed alarm over the proposal. “It’s very alarming because the shuttle wasn’t designed to be disassembled,” he told Space.com. “You would have to break the shuttle into at least six major component parts, probably more.” Stief emphasized that dismantling the orbiter would mean removing thousands of thermal tiles and cutting through miles of wiring, an act that could irreparably harm a piece of history “specifically preserved to keep all that intact.”
Lawmakers sympathetic to the Smithsonian’s stance including Senators Mark Kelly, Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, and Richard Durbin urged congressional committees to block the transfer. In their joint letter, they wrote: “Houston’s disappointment in not being selected is wholly understandable, but removing an item from the National Collection is not a viable solution.” They warned that reversing a decision made nearly 15 years ago “invites ambiguity, public distrust and the erosion of institutional commitments.”
Cornyn and Cruz, however, accused the Smithsonian of conducting a “frivolous misinformation campaign” and questioned its cost projections, claiming private-sector estimates were “more than 10 times lower.” Their letter also challenged the museum’s claim of independence, arguing that the Smithsonian, while unique, remains a creation of Congress and is thus bound by federal law. “The United States Department of the Treasury holds and manages the Smithsonian’s original trust fund,” their statement read, asserting that “two-thirds of the Smithsonian’s budget derives from federal appropriations.”
Yet the Smithsonian maintains its legal ownership over Discovery, citing NASA’s 2012 transfer of “all rights, title, interest, and ownership.” As a “trust instrumentality,” the Institution operates independently from direct federal control, a status that could make the government’s relocation order both unprecedented and legally questionable. “We remain concerned about the unprecedented nature of a removal of an object from the national collection,” museum officials warned, adding that the process could “cause damage to the most intact orbiter from the space shuttle program.”
For advocates like Stief, even legal protection may not be enough. “Even if the letter of the law is, and it probably is, in their favor,” he said, “the legal angle is not something we feel we can rely on.”
As Congress remains in partial shutdown, the fight over Discovery’s fate is now tied to the ongoing fiscal year 2026 budget negotiations. Competing provisions could either protect the shuttle’s place in the Smithsonian or enforce its relocation once funding resumes.
And amid all the political wrangling, one truth remains clear. As Stief said: “Even if you had an unlimited budget, this wouldn’t be the right thing to do.”