Key Metrics
20.77
Heat Index-
Impact LevelMedium
-
Scope LevelNational
-
Last Update2025-08-06
Key Impacts
Positive Impacts (3)
Negative Impacts (1)
Event Overview
The deletion of key constitutional clauses from a U.S. government website raises concerns about transparency and the preservation of legal frameworks. This action involves the removal of provisions governing federal powers and limitations, potentially undermining public access to foundational governance principles. The incident highlights vulnerabilities in digital repositories of legal texts and may reflect broader tensions around institutional accountability and constitutional interpretation.
Collect Records
Sections of Article I of the U.S. Constitution Removed from Congress.gov Website
On an unspecified recent date, sections of Article I of the U.S. Constitution—specifically Sections 9 and 10, including the Habeas Corpus clause—were deleted from the annotated Constitution on the official U.S. Congressional website, congress.gov. Multiple sources report that if a user attempts to access these sections on the site, they are no longer available; the content now jumps from the end of Section 8 directly to Article II, omitting Section 9 and Section 10 entirely.
Section 9 of Article I includes several clauses, notably the Emoluments Clause and, most significantly, the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus, which states: “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” The website maintained by the nonprofit National Constitution Center still contains this content, but the congressional version no longer does.
The removal is from the congress.gov online version only and does not constitute an actual legal change to the U.S. Constitution; printed versions and other official government sources still retain the full text. No official statement has been found within the article from Congress.gov or the U.S. government regarding the deletion. The event has caused concern and speculation among observers and commentators. No technical cause, procedural rationale, or restoration timeline is detailed in the available content. No official numbers of affected pages or annotations are provided. The article refers to this as a notable omission but clarifies that the legal status of the Constitution has not changed as a result.