Several teachers have asked me about the President’s proclamation regarding “Mount McKinley” and the “Gulf of America”, wondering what they should call them in class. This reveals one of the few silver linings of the year’s worth of changes wedged into the last three weeks; the uncovering of thousands of social studies learning opportunities that come along with them.
Regardless of personal views on the present Administration’s announcements regarding the naming of bodies of water, mountains and army bases, the traditional, legal and social practices of naming where we are and what we built has a long history.
Social Studies is the study of how people live their lives as individuals and in groups so conclusions about what they do and why they do it are always complicated, complex and filled with exceptions. With those disclaimers in mind – let’s dig in.
Although the president has said many things about the “Gulf of America”, the Executive Order that lies at the heart of the legal and administrative documentation of this change is entitled “Restoring Names that Honor America’s Greatness”. It claims that “it is in the national interest to promote the extraordinary heritage of our Nation” through the “naming of our national treasures”.
Denali or Mount McKinley
The Executive Order uses the legal authority of the federal government to name geographic features on land controlled by the federal government to change the legal designation of the 18,000 foot mountain at 63° N, 151° W to “Mount McKinley”. That legal authority is established in the US Code (43 U.S.C. 364 through 364f) and exercised through the Secretary of the Interior. In 2015 that legal authority was used by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell to change the federal designation of that very same mountain from “Mount McKinley” to the traditional Koyukon Athabascan name of “Denali”. With his Executive Order, the president is ordering the Secretary of the Interior to change the name back to “Mount McKinley”.
The changing of legal names of locations and geographic features is an ongoing process, reflecting changing social, political and historical understandings and interpretations as well as concerted efforts to change them. Comparing the explanations provided to change the federal designation of Mount McKinley to Denali in 2015 and the explanation to change it back to Mount McKinley in 2025 is revealing.
In 2015, Secretary Jewell said, “This name change recognizes the sacred status of Denali to many Alaska Natives.” “The name Denali has been official for use by the State of Alaska since 1975, but even more importantly, the mountain has been known as Denali for generations. With our own sense of reverence for this place, we are officially renaming the mountain Denali in recognition of the traditions of Alaska Natives and the strong support of the people of Alaska”.
The 2025 Executive Order describes the 2015 name change as “an affront to President McKinley’s life, his achievements, and his sacrifice”. It explains that the 2025 Executive Order “honors President McKinley for giving his life for our great Nation and dutifully recognizes his historic legacy of protecting America’s interests and generating enormous wealth for all Americans.”
After thinking about the relative merits of these explanations, it’s important to remember that this only refers to the legally-official references to the mountain in federal publications and signs on land controlled by the federal government. It does not affect legally-official references to the mountain by the State of Alaska or signs on land controlled by the state of Alaska.
Beyond these specific contexts however, the renaming of the mountain may have the same impact as speed limit signs on federal interstate highways. Individuals are still free to use any name they wish.
Gulf of Mexico or Gulf of America
Just as the naming of Denali reflects cultural and historical tensions, the proposed renaming of the Gulf of Mexico raises questions about the motivations behind geographic naming. The Executive Order uses the same legal authority to direct the Secretary of the Interior to “take all appropriate actions to rename as the “Gulf of America” ….. the area formerly named as the “Gulf of Mexico” in “recognition of this flourishing economic resource and its critical importance to our Nation’s economy and its people”.
This reasoning for changing a geographic name can be contrasted with a 2015 Order from the Secretary of Interior declaring “Squaw” a derogatory term to have it removed from geographic names (there were a lot more of them than you might think). This was done previously with derogatory terms referring to African-Americans in 1962, and derogatory terms referring to Japanese in 1974. These changes are executed through the Board of Geographic Names, which recommends name changes when a name is determined to be derogatory or is shown to be offensive to a particular racial or ethnic group, gender, or religious group. But, as explained in its Guidelines, the Board is cautious in responding to requests for changes, these are the only three words “considered derogatory by the BGN in all occurrences.”
The Executive Orders direction update “the GNIS to reflect the renaming of the Gulf and remove all references to the Gulf of Mexico” is a reference to the Geographic Naming Information System, a resource provided by the US Geological Survey. It provides a compilation of legally-official names along with detailed mapping and searching tools, allowing the curious to search thousands of geographic names and their history. Searching terms and clicking through the “details” of the records uncovers hundreds of racist epithets that have been changed. Many other terms which may not be as universally regarded as offensive haven’t changed, like a 15 mile long tributary of the Teton River in Idaho which retains the name “Bitch Creek”.
In some cases, conflicts over the naming and renaming of places can take unexpected turns. A military installation was established in North Carolina in 1918 and named “Fort Bragg” in honor of Confederate General Braxton Bragg. In 2022, a commission established by Congress to reevaluate the naming of military installations honoring people who sided with the Confederate Army in the Civil War recommended changing the name of “Fort Bragg”. As a result, it was changed to “Fort Liberty” by the Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin. Last week, the current Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, changed the name back to “Fort Bragg”. Although you couldn’t be faulted for assuming this returns the honor of the Confederate general, this this name change is explained as honoring Pfc. Roland L. Bragg, a World War II hero who earned the Silver Star and Purple Heart for his exceptional courage during the Battle of the Bulge. Although it’s easy to find that more than a million Purple Hearts were awarded for service in World War II, it’s difficult to determine how many of them were named Bragg.
In some cases, naming has geopolitical implications, such as when the United States refused to recognize the name “Myramar”, continuing to use the name “Burma” because the name Myanmar was imposed by the ruling military junta of Burma in the 1990s, ignoring the results of civil elections. The Red, White, and Blueland Act of 2025 (H.R. 1161) which calls for “Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to Greenland shall be deemed to be a reference to “Red, White, and Blueland”.
Just as the federal government exercises legal authority to name geographic locations, the states and local governments do as well. In 2020, Rhode Island voters approved a constitutional amendment to drop “and Providence Plantations” from the state’s official name. That same year, Southampton County, Virginia changed the name of “Blackhead Signpost Road” to just “Signpost Road” removing a reference to those executed after Nat Turner’s rebellion.
So What?
So where does this leave the 4th or 5th grade teacher responding to a student who asks “why are we not allowed to call it the Gulf of Mexico”?
I’d say you should tackle that phrasing first, “not allowed to call” is a divisive, polarizing phrase, most often used by people resisting changes to language. It shouldn’t take too much heavy lifting to move that to what “we should say” and what “we should not say”.
Geographic naming can be made accessible to younger students with a simple question – so what should we call our classroom? Is it “Ms. Crabtree’s room” or “Room 18”. Are we talking to students and other teachers or are we giving directions to first-responders racing down the hall? First responders might not know Ms. Crabtree, but they could easily find the room between Room 17 and Room 19.
Should students have the authority to vote on a new name for the classroom or should the teacher decide? If students had a chance to democratically name their classroom – what names would they nominate and why? Are they trying to instill spirit in their classmates, or honor someone from the past? Should they honor a sports team? A celebrity? Should they choose a name that deliberately hurts someone’s feelings?
If the name you nominated and wanted lost in the election, should you use the name that won the election? Why? What would you accomplish by insisting on the name you wanted? How will others react? What’s best for everyone in the class?
It’s just as possible to explain what’s happening in language younger students can understand. The president’s Executive Order uses legal authority to change the official name of a mountain in Alaska to “Mount McKinley” to honor President McKinley, who was important in U.S. history. The federal government called Mount McKinley for a long time, though it was changed to Denali about ten years ago in honor of the native people who have been living around it for hundreds of years. This change only affects federal signs and documents. The state of Alaska can still call it “Denali,” and people can use whichever name they like.
New Jersey teachers can drive this lesson home by asking students to question their parents about “Taylor Ham” and “Pork Roll”.
Like many lessons in Social Studies, teachers can feel successful if students leave lessons like this knowing that things are often more complicated than they first seem. The naming of geographic features is a complex process shaped by legal, cultural, and political factors, reflecting evolving societal values and historical interpretations. Rather than shying away from current events, teachers can take advantage of them by engaging students in critical thinking about language, history, and identity. The names we use are more than just words—they are reflections of who we are and what we value as a society.
Who we are and what we value are some of the important questions to explore in the classroom today.