Washington, D.C. – Sections 9 and 10, along with parts of Section 8, of Article I of the U.S. Constitution were temporarily absent from the Library of Congress's "Constitution Annotated" website (constitution.congress.gov), sparking widespread concern and discussion online. The disappearance, first noted around August 6, 2025, prompted a tweet from user 🅱🅔🅝 asking, "So... anyone know why section 9 and 10 was removed from the official website describing the constitution?"
The Library of Congress quickly addressed the issue, attributing the omission to a "coding error." In a statement posted on social media, the institution confirmed, "It has been brought to our attention that some sections of Article 1 are missing from the Constitution Annotated...website. We've learned that this is due to a coding error. We have been working to correct this and expect it to be resolved soon." A disclaimer was also added to the website acknowledging "data issues."
Article I, Section 9, enumerates significant limitations on the powers of Congress, notably including the clause protecting the writ of habeas corpus, which safeguards individuals against unlawful detention. This section also prohibits bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and the granting of titles of nobility. Article I, Section 10, outlines restrictions on the powers of individual states, preventing them from entering into treaties, coining money, or engaging in war without congressional consent.
The temporary removal of these foundational clauses, particularly the habeas corpus provision, drew considerable attention and suspicion from some commentators, given prior public discussions by senior administration officials regarding the potential suspension of habeas corpus. Despite these concerns, experts emphasized that changes to the website do not alter the legal text or validity of the U.S. Constitution itself, which remains unchanged and is fully accessible on the National Archives website.
The sections were reportedly restored to the Library of Congress website shortly after the issue gained public traction. The incident underscores the critical role of official government websites in providing accurate and accessible information regarding foundational legal documents, even as it highlights the vulnerabilities of digital platforms to technical glitches.