Slavery exhibit returns to Philadelphia after federal judge's order

Parks workers restored panels about slavery at the President's House in Philadelphia after a federal judge ordered the materials put back; city leaders welcomed the reinstatement.

Parks workers have reinstalled exhibition panels about the history of slavery at the President's House in Philadelphia after a federal judge ordered the materials returned. The panels were removed late in January by the Trump administration. The panels had been installed under a joint city-federal agreement in 2006 and became the subject of a city lawsuit contesting the removal. City and state officials publicly welcomed the restoration and visited the site as work proceeded. What is known: - Parks workers restored the panels that describe the history of slavery and the people enslaved at the site, and National Park Service staff assisted in the work. - U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe ordered the exhibit returned and, in her ruling, compared the administration's conduct to themes in George Orwell's 1984, saying the government did not have the power to "dissemble and disassemble historical truths." - Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle L. Parker sued the administration over the removal and attended the site after the panels were restored; Pennsylvania leaders expressed approval of the reinstatement. - The administration said it planned to replace the placards with updated interpretive materials, including the history of the nine enslaved people who lived at the President's House, and said the National Park Service routinely updates exhibits. - The removal in late January, on the eve of Black History Month, was reported as part of a broader review of historical materials at federal sites and museums; the administration has appealed the judge's order. Summary: The court-ordered restoration returned the site's previous exhibit about slavery to public view and prompted public remarks from city and state officials. Legal proceedings continue, as the Trump administration has filed an appeal of the order, so further judicial review is expected.