Verified: Jan 4, 2026
Last updated 2 weeks ago. Our resources are updated regularly but please keep in mind that links, programs, policies, and contact information do change.
On January 20, 2025, just hours after taking office for his second term, Donald Trump signed a proclamation pardoning more than 1,500 people convicted of crimes related to the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack. Within days, the Department of Justice removed its searchable database containing detailed information about every case it had prosecuted—charges filed, evidence presented, sentences imposed.
If you want to know what someone pardoned by Trump was convicted of doing on January 6, that information is now much harder to find. If researchers want to study how the justice system handled one of the largest criminal investigations in U.S. history, the comprehensive database they would have used no longer exists in an accessible form. If Congress wants to investigate what happened, key records have been destroyed or hidden.
Federal statutes prohibit the destruction of government records, including key laws like 44 U.S.C. § 3106 (which requires agencies to notify the National Archives when records are unlawfully destroyed), the Federal Records Act, and the Presidential Records Act. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington sent a formal letter to the Justice Department’s Inspector General arguing that removing the database violates 44 U.S.C. § 3106, which requires agencies to notify the National Archives when records are unlawfully destroyed. There’s no indication that notification happened.
What Got Deleted
The DOJ database was a searchable compilation of facts: who was charged, with what crimes, what evidence prosecutors presented, what sentences judges imposed. Journalists used it to track cases. Defense attorneys used it to find comparable sentencing for appeals. Researchers used it to understand patterns in how the justice system responded to political violence.
By deleting the database, the administration made it much harder for the public to verify what exactly was pardoned. The information technically still exists in individual court files scattered across federal courthouses, but assembling it into a comprehensive picture now requires the kind of time and resources most people don’t have.
When administrations change, websites get updated. Old press releases come down, new policy priorities go up. What’s happening now is different: the deletion of factual records, research data, and historical documentation that people rely on for health decisions, legal research, and understanding what their government has done.
Federal Laws Protecting Records
After Watergate, Congress passed the Presidential Records Act to prevent presidents from destroying or hiding records. The law established that records created by the president and White House staff belong to the American people, not to the president personally. When a president leaves office, those records automatically transfer to the National Archives. Presidents can restrict access to certain categories of records, but they cannot destroy the records.
Congress learned from Nixon’s attempt to control White House tapes and from the widespread document destruction during the Watergate cover-up. The Watergate investigation revealed what happens when presidents can destroy evidence of their own misconduct. Congress responded by making such destruction illegal.
Laws only work if someone enforces them.
Enforcement Challenges
The Department of Justice Inspector General could investigate whether the DOJ violated federal law by removing the January 6 database. But the Inspector General serves within the DOJ, under an attorney general who reports to President Trump. The structural independence that’s supposed to protect inspectors general from political pressure has limits.
Criminal prosecution requires proving willfulness—that officials knew they were breaking the law and did it anyway. It also requires prosecutors willing to bring charges, which means either the current administration prosecuting itself (unlikely) or a future administration prosecuting former officials (possible but rare).
Congress has oversight authority and subpoena power. A Congressional committee could demand the deleted records, investigate who ordered their removal, and hold hearings about whether laws were broken. But that requires Congress wanting to investigate. A Republican-controlled Congress is unlikely to aggressively pursue a Republican president’s record deletions.
Courts can intervene if someone with legal standing sues, but that requires proving you were harmed by the deletion in a way courts recognize as giving you the right to sue. It’s not enough to be generally concerned about government transparency—you need a concrete injury.
Who Benefits From Secrecy
When Trump issued his January 20 proclamation pardoning January 6 defendants, he simultaneously removed the public’s ability to verify what he pardoned. Without the searchable database, Americans cannot quickly look up an individual defendant to see what they were convicted of doing, what evidence was presented, or what sentence they received.
This serves the interests of people who received pardons. It also serves the interests of the president who issued them, because it makes it harder for critics to demonstrate that the pardons included people convicted of serious violent crimes against police officers.
By removing government websites, deleting social media posts, and scrubbing official databases, the administration makes it harder for journalists, researchers, and Congress to document what happened and how the government responded. Transparency mechanisms that usually hold government accountable become less effective when the underlying records disappear.
The Archivist’s Removal
In February 2025, Trump removed Colleen Shogan, the Archivist of the United States, without stating a reason.
The Archivist serves as a check on executive power over records. The position is supposed to be nonpartisan and independent, appointed based on professional qualifications rather than political loyalty. By removing the Archivist without explanation and without following the legal requirement to notify Congress, the administration undermined the independence of the one agency designed to protect government records from political manipulation.
The Society of American Archivists issued a statement expressing alarm at the dismissal and its implications for federal records integrity. The preservation of government records isn’t about history for its own sake. It’s about maintaining the documentary evidence that makes accountability possible.
Can Deleted Records Be Recovered?
The Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine has captured many government websites over the years, creating a historical record of what those sites contained at different points in time. Much of the deleted DOJ database can be found there. Journalists and researchers who want information removed from official government sites can sometimes locate it through the Archive.
Not all government websites or databases get captured by the Wayback Machine. The Archive’s crawlers might miss certain pages, particularly interactive databases that don’t work the same way on archived copies. The Internet Archive is a nonprofit without legal obligation to preserve records. Its existence depends on funding and goodwill. If it faced financial challenges or legal pressure to remove content, the public record could disappear entirely.
There’s something troubling about privatizing the preservation of public records. The government creates these records using taxpayer money. The law requires their preservation. Yet we’re now in a situation where a private nonprofit bears responsibility for maintaining access to government information that the government itself is trying to erase.
The Freedom of Information Act allows anyone to request records from federal agencies. You can file a FOIA request at foia.gov demanding that an agency explain what happened to deleted records. But FOIA requests take time—the law allows agencies 20 business days for an initial response, though many exceed that timeline. For ongoing prosecutions or emerging events, the delay can be problematic. FOIA requests can be denied if the government claims an exemption applies.
Congress has subpoena power and can demand that agencies produce records. But that requires the party controlling Congress to want to pursue the matter.
How to Access or Recover Records
You can file FOIA requests for records you want to see. Identify the records you want, make a specific request to the appropriate agency through foia.gov, and wait for a response. You don’t need a lawyer. You don’t need to explain why you want the records. The agency has to respond within 20 business days (though extensions are common). If they deny your request, you can appeal and potentially sue in federal court.
You can use the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine to find deleted government pages. If you know the URL of a page that’s been removed, enter it at archive.org to see past versions. This helps verify whether information has been altered or deleted.
You can contact your member of Congress. Congressional offices track constituent concerns, and enough inquiries about records preservation might prompt oversight hearings or investigations. Congress has authority over federal agencies and can request investigations or hold hearings.
You can support organizations working on these issues. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the Brennan Center for Justice, the Project on Government Oversight, and the Society of American Archivists all work to preserve records and promote government transparency. Some litigate when necessary to challenge government actions that violate the law.
You can stay informed through news sources that investigate government accountability. Major outlets have been documenting the records deletions. Supporting quality journalism that holds power accountable contributes to the broader effort to maintain transparency.
Historical Precedent and Democratic Accountability
When a government systematically removes information about its own actions, it undermines the mechanisms that allow democracies to hold power accountable.
Citizens need to see what their government does to make informed decisions about whether they support those actions and whether they want to re-elect the officials responsible. When government records are available, journalists can investigate. Researchers can study history and learn from the past. Courts can access evidence needed to administer justice. Congress can conduct oversight.
Erasing records breaks that assumption. Authoritarian governments do this. The Chinese government’s suppression of information about the Tiananmen Square massacre occurred through control of records and restriction of information. The Argentine military junta’s disappearance of dissidents in the 1970s included erasure of records about those individuals. Governments that want to hide crimes or prevent accountability typically try to control information.
Complete erasure is difficult in the modern world. Videos of the Capitol attack exist in multiple locations and have been preserved by media organizations. The House January 6 Committee’s final report and supporting materials are officially archived. Some information is durable.
But ease of access matters. If information requires hunting through multiple databases, spending hours in archives, and navigating bureaucratic obstacles, fewer people will access it. The public understanding becomes hazier. The collective memory becomes weaker. Accountability becomes harder to achieve.
If the Trump administration can delete records about January 6 without facing serious consequences, the next administration might delete records about immigration enforcement, environmental violations, pandemic response, or foreign policy failures. Once the norm of permanent record preservation is broken, it’s difficult to restore. Presidents and officials might delete information they find embarrassing or inconvenient.
Preventing that outcome will require either the current administration deciding to restore the deleted records, or a future administration or Congress taking action to reverse the deletions and establish stronger protections. It will require that enforcement mechanisms—courts, Congress, inspectors general—are willing to investigate and hold officials accountable. It will require public pressure and support for the archivists and historians who dedicate their careers to preserving the historical record.
A future president will need to decide that restoring those protections matters enough to pursue it, even against political opposition. Congress will need to be willing to investigate and consider legislation to strengthen records protections. The courts will need to rule that record destruction violates the law, even when it’s done by an administration with other political priorities.
Our articles make government information more accessible. Please consult a qualified professional for financial, legal, or health advice specific to your circumstances.