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 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?
This isn't Sydney Sweeney in blue jeans, this is a core tenet of our republic.
So your notion that this is dunking on the Library of Congress, not the administration is wrong.
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.
That includes the Writ of Habeas Corpus, prohibition of ex post facto laws, prohibition against preferential treatment between states, the requirement that any money spent must be written into law, and the emoluments clause disallowing any federal officers from receiving gifts from foreign states.
Of those I listed, the current administration has violated all except the ex post facto prohibition, perhaps only because the president doesn't write laws.
That said, the act of removing the text from the website is not by itself a reason to become too concerned, both because it's a relatively minor offense (you can still find the full text in dozens of other locations) and because it's better to assume incompetence rather than malice caused said change.
Habeas corpus and domestic militias are in there too.
also @ doesnt do anything i dont think, his email is easy to find if you have questions
Fair point. I doubt there would be anything meaningful in the comments.
1. It's congress's website, not the whitehouse's
2. It's clearly a sort of crappy development approach - the website uses jquery and fontawesome and adobe analytics. this isn't FAANG level engineering happening here
3. It's a website about EXPLAINING THE CONSTITUTION. What do we know people use to make summaries or explanations of things? LLMs, of course
4. What is known for randomly deleting and omitting stuff? Also LLMs!
5. Can we guess why an LLM would have deleted that part? Why yes, actually, we can: if you go to the explanation part of the site, do you know what's also missing (and was prior to this update too?). Wow, it's the bottom part of section 1! What a coincidence
The clear answer here is: someone was using an LLM to write, review, or edit content, and it deleted the bottom of section 1 because there wasn't an explanation to go along with it. It makes even more sense that this is what happening given that this section was already missing an explanation.
It's really tiring how some underpaid intern making a mistake on a website has people suggesting trump is committing a new form of treason.