3 ms·

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. Ye

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 1y 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 1y 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 energy 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?
  - alistairSH 1y ago
    That's fair, except the administration is also making noise about removing/reducing habeas corpus. At the same time, somebody in Congress has removed the bit of the constitution that informs the people that habeas corpus exists. This isn't Sydney Sweeney in blue jeans, this is a core tenet of our republic.
    - tptacek 1y ago
      No, it's a website.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - Eddy_Viscosity2 1y ago
        No, its a core tenet that was displayed on a website (or at least it was until it was removed).
        tptacek 1y ago
        No, it really is just a website.
tptacek 1y 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.
- CalChris 1y ago
  The Librarian of Congress is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The President can fire the Librarian basically at will. There's no similar advice+consent language. So Trump fired Carla Hayden in May. He has not nominated a replacement but instead name one of his lawyers as acting Librarian. So your notion that this is dunking on the Library of Congress, not the administration is wrong.
axus 1y 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.

alistairSH 1y 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 1y 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 energy 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?
- alistairSH 1y ago
  That's fair, except the administration is also making noise about removing/reducing habeas corpus. At the same time, somebody in Congress has removed the bit of the constitution that informs the people that habeas corpus exists. This isn't Sydney Sweeney in blue jeans, this is a core tenet of our republic.
  - tptacek 1y ago
    No, it's a website.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - Eddy_Viscosity2 1y ago
      No, its a core tenet that was displayed on a website (or at least it was until it was removed).
      - tptacek 1y ago
        No, it really is just a website.

tptacek 1y 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.

CalChris 1y ago
The Librarian of Congress is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The President can fire the Librarian basically at will. There's no similar advice+consent language. So Trump fired Carla Hayden in May. He has not nominated a replacement but instead name one of his lawyers as acting Librarian. So your notion that this is dunking on the Library of Congress, not the administration is wrong.

axus 1y 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.