I know a previous submission got flagged quickly but this isn’t a small thing. Yes it’s a deletion on one site of many. Yes the physical text hasn’t changed. Yes it’s likely an error.
But the stability of the US and its ability to be a good environment for business is predicated upon it being a country governed by laws. This is further evidence, even if it’s just an error, that the current government is cavalier in a way that others have not been in a long time.
alistairSH · 25m ago
This is a bit different... most of the previous reports were complete pages being removed. This is a copy of the Constitution that's had a few key sections removed.
It's not just "some info" the admin doesn't like. It's the law of the land.
And given the actions of this administration thus far, attributing that removal to malice is absolutely warranted until proven otherwise.
tpmoney · 4m ago
> And given the actions of this administration thus far, attributing that removal to malice is absolutely warranted until proven otherwise.
No it’s not. Given the actions of the current administration it is vital that else learn to distinguish between a real issue and non-issues and react accordingly. People only have so many hours in their day or every to spend on caring about something. If we overreact to every minor event, we will use up precious energy and political capital on useless panic. Worse we will train people that when we raise the alarm there’s actually nothing to worry about. Have we all forgotten the lessons of The Boy Who Cried Wolf? Have we forgotten that not only is the lesson that if you keep crying wolf people will stop believing you, but also that eventually the wolf will come and it will eat all the sheep and everyone will starve?
axus · 3m ago
Likely an error? During this administration, while rule of law is ignored, in the nation's founding legal document, localized entirely within powers and rights the executive branch doesn't like?
Yes.
My first impression was everything after a certain line got deleted, everything AFTER "To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;" starting with the Navy.
But it's at least interesting that this part of the website was under review at all, let alone that the change made it to production.
tptacek · 18m ago
It's a small thing. Nobody is losing track of what the constitution says. Also, you're dunking on the Library of Congress, not the administration.
tptacek · 15m ago
I love that this says "key sections" of the Constitution. It's a gigantic chunk of Article I, including authorization to form a Navy and the prohibition on unilateral duties of tonnage. It's all a gigantic scheme to allow Kentucky to issue letters of marque and reprisal!
cwmoore · 3m ago
Not so sure about your square quotes or the maritime Kentucky references, but glad that the errors gave me a reason to revisit the document.
Habeas corpus and domestic militias are in there too.
If the Founding Fathers had wanted the Constitution to be on a website, they’d have done it that way to begin with. Parchment, quill, and some ink was good enough for them; it’s certainly good enough for us.
gmerc · 24m ago
It's fine, it's just paper absent anyone actually enforcing it. Whatcha gonna do about it, rise up?
alistairSH · 24m ago
SCOTUS will save us! </snark>
Maken · 12m ago
Nowhere in the Constitution is stated that an Executive Orden cannot rewrite the Constitution itself.
kevin_thibedeau · 8m ago
There is already a Reagan era order that subverts the fourth amendment for certain people.
rubyfan · 15m ago
Four legs good, two legs bad
Oarch · 21m ago
They just reappeared in the British Museum
impish9208 · 5m ago
King Charles III finally accomplishes what King George III couldn’t — bringing the colonies back under the Union Jack.
But the stability of the US and its ability to be a good environment for business is predicated upon it being a country governed by laws. This is further evidence, even if it’s just an error, that the current government is cavalier in a way that others have not been in a long time.
It's not just "some info" the admin doesn't like. It's the law of the land.
And given the actions of this administration thus far, attributing that removal to malice is absolutely warranted until proven otherwise.
No it’s not. Given the actions of the current administration it is vital that else learn to distinguish between a real issue and non-issues and react accordingly. People only have so many hours in their day or every to spend on caring about something. If we overreact to every minor event, we will use up precious energy and political capital on useless panic. Worse we will train people that when we raise the alarm there’s actually nothing to worry about. Have we all forgotten the lessons of The Boy Who Cried Wolf? Have we forgotten that not only is the lesson that if you keep crying wolf people will stop believing you, but also that eventually the wolf will come and it will eat all the sheep and everyone will starve?
Yes.
My first impression was everything after a certain line got deleted, everything AFTER "To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;" starting with the Navy.
But it's at least interesting that this part of the website was under review at all, let alone that the change made it to production.
Habeas corpus and domestic militias are in there too.