Listen to the article
A federal judge delivered a stern rebuke to Justice Department lawyers Friday, calling their arguments “dangerous” and “horrifying” after they claimed the Trump Administration has the right to decide which aspects of American history are displayed at National Park Service sites.
The confrontation occurred during a Philadelphia hearing regarding the sudden removal of an exhibit about slavery at the former President’s House on Independence Mall. Workers had used crowbars to dismantle outdoor plaques, panels, and interpretive materials that told the stories of nine enslaved people who lived at the site during George Washington’s presidency.
“You can’t erase history once you’ve learned it. It doesn’t work that way,” said Senior U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe, who was appointed by President George W. Bush.
The exhibit’s dismantling followed President Donald Trump’s executive order “restoring truth and sanity to American history” at national museums, parks, and landmarks. Workers placed the materials in a pickup truck before transferring them to storage, prompting Judge Rufe to express concern about potential damage.
During the hearing, Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory in den Berken argued that “the government gets to choose the message it wants to convey,” noting that “although many people feel strongly about this exhibit one way, other people may disagree or feel strongly another way.”
Judge Rufe immediately interrupted, saying, “That is a dangerous statement you are making. It is horrifying to listen to. It changes on the whims of someone in charge? I’m sorry, that is not what we elected anybody for.”
The case highlights tensions between historical accuracy, government authority, and public memory at federally managed heritage sites. The President’s House exhibit was a collaborative project between Philadelphia and the National Park Service developed two decades ago, with the city contributing $1.5 million toward its creation.
The contested exhibit included biographical information about Austin, Paris, Hercules, Christopher Sheels, Richmond, Giles, Oney Judge, Moll, and Joe—all enslaved by George and Martha Washington at the presidential mansion. Following the removal, only their names remain engraved in a cement wall at the site.
In den Berken maintained that the Park Service routinely updates its exhibits and tours, arguing the government cannot be compelled to present specific historical narratives. Attorneys for Philadelphia countered that federal agencies do not have “carte blanche” to interpret national history as they please, particularly when local governments have invested in collaborative projects.
Michael Coard, representing advocacy groups supporting the exhibit, expressed alarm at the government’s position. “It’s one thing to whisper that type of dictatorial power. But to send lawyers into a public courtroom to make that argument is absolutely frightening,” he said. “I’m really worried about the state of America.”
The controversy has sparked significant community response, with residents leaving flowers at the site and posting handmade signs reading “Slavery was real.”
The timing of the dispute is particularly significant as Philadelphia prepares for an influx of visitors celebrating the nation’s 250th anniversary. Judge Rufe, who plans to inspect both the storage facility and the exhibit site before ruling, promised a swift decision on the city’s request to restore the materials.
The case underscores broader national debates about historical interpretation, the presentation of difficult aspects of American history, and the relationship between federal agencies and local communities in managing cultural heritage sites.
Judge Rufe ordered that no further alterations be made to the site while the case proceeds, emphasizing the importance of preserving historical integrity at one of the nation’s most symbolically significant locations.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
The judge’s strong language is completely warranted. Trying to erase the stories of enslaved people is a dangerous and unacceptable attempt to rewrite history.
Absolutely. We cannot allow the government to selectively choose which parts of our shared history are presented to the public. Transparency and honesty are essential.
The judge is absolutely right to call out the Justice Department’s stance as ‘dangerous’ and ‘horrifying’. Erasing the stories of enslaved people is a shameful attempt to rewrite history.
Agreed. We must confront the full truth of America’s past, even when it’s uncomfortable. Dismantling this exhibit is a troubling step in the wrong direction.
The judge’s strong rebuke of the Justice Department’s stance is absolutely warranted. We cannot allow the government to selectively choose which parts of history are presented to the public.
Exactly. History belongs to all of us, not just those in power. Dismantling this exhibit is an affront to the truth and a disservice to the public.
This is a concerning development that highlights the ongoing battle over how we interpret and present American history. We must remain vigilant against efforts to whitewash or distort the past.
Well said. Preserving an accurate, inclusive account of our history, even the darkest chapters, is crucial for building a more just and equitable future.
This is a concerning development that speaks to a larger trend of historical revisionism and the whitewashing of America’s past. We must remain vigilant against these attempts to distort the truth.
I share your concern. Preserving an accurate, unvarnished account of our history, including the painful parts, is essential for building a more just and equitable society.
This is a concerning case where the government appears to be trying to whitewash history. Erasing or minimizing the stories of enslaved people is dangerous and goes against the principles of honest, inclusive education.
I agree, it’s critical that we confront the full truth of America’s history, both the good and the bad. Censoring displays about slavery is a troubling attempt to rewrite the past.