A federal judge in Pennsylvania on Monday directed the National Park Service to reinstall a slavery exhibit at a historic Philadelphia site while the courts consider ongoing legal challenges brought by the city over its removal.
The display, which had been part of the President’s House Site in Independence National Historical Park, was dismantled and taken down last month following public criticism from President Donald Trump alleging an "anti-American ideology" at certain historical and cultural institutions. Civil rights groups have disputed that characterization.
Philadelphia responded by suing the Department of the Interior and senior officials, contending that the removal violated the law and asking a judge to order the exhibit restored. On Monday a federal judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted the city's request for temporary relief, blocking the federal government’s changes and instructing the National Park Service to put the exhibit back in place while the litigation proceeds.
"Court is now asked to determine whether the federal government has the power it claims - to dissemble and disassemble historical truths when it has some domain over historical facts," Judge Cynthia Rufe wrote in her opinion. "It does not."
Neither the National Park Service nor the city of Philadelphia provided immediate comment in response to inquiries about the judge’s order.
The President’s House Site highlights the period when George Washington lived in Philadelphia while the city served as the nation’s capital, and the exhibit addressed the history of slavery and Washington’s ownership of enslaved people. The judge’s order requires that this interpretive material be returned to public view pending the final outcome of the lawsuit.
The dispute has drawn attention from civil rights groups, which have accused the administration of rolling back social progress by prompting the removal. The court's temporary injunction preserves the exhibit while legal questions about federal authority over historical interpretation are decided.
As the case continues, the exhibit’s status will remain settled by judicial proceedings rather than administrative action, at least for the present.