A federal judge in Pennsylvania has ordered the National Park Service to reinstall a historic slavery exhibit at a Philadelphia landmark, reversing a controversial removal under the Trump administration. The decision comes after the city of Philadelphia sued the federal government for dismantling the display. The exhibit, located at the Independence National Historical Park, documents the lives of enslaved people in the first official presidential residence, once home to George Washington and John Adams. Last month, the National Park Service removed it after former President Donald Trump criticized the display, claiming it promoted an “anti-American ideology.” Civil rights groups had strongly rejected these claims. Philadelphia officials filed a lawsuit against the Department of the Interior, which supervises the National Park Service, arguing that the removal violated federal law. The city requested the exhibit’s immediate restoration while litigation continues. Federal Judge Cynthia Rufe granted the city’s request on Monday, ordering the National Park Service to restore the exhibit to its previous condition. In her ruling, Rufe drew a striking comparison to George Orwell’s 1984, warning against attempts to rewrite history. “As if the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s 1984 now existed, with its motto ‘Ignorance is Strength,’ this 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,” Rufe wrote. “It does not.” The order directs the National Park Service to return the President’s House site to the state it held on January 21, 2026, the day before the exhibit was removed. During a hearing last month, the judge described the Trump administration’s claim that a president could unilaterally alter national park exhibits as “horrifying” and “dangerous.” She also detailed the origins of the historical display, which highlights the presence of enslaved Africans in the first presidential residence. “At the turn of this century, historians identified the location of the first official residence of the President of the United States, where Presidents Washington and Adams lived during their terms,” Rufe wrote. “This research also identified nine enslaved Africans whom President Washington brought to the residence. Their rotations in and out of Pennsylvania prevented them from petitioning for freedom under state law.” The exhibit names each enslaved person: Oney Judge, Austin, Christopher Sheels, Giles, Hercules Posey, Joe Richardson, Moll, Paris, and Richmond. The ruling noted the significant historical impact of their lives. Oney Judge escaped in 1796 and eventually settled in New Hampshire, while Hercules later gained freedom after being brought to Mount Vernon. The ruling emphasizes the importance of preserving factual history. Judge Rufe made it clear that federal authorities cannot erase uncomfortable aspects of the nation’s past simply because they may be politically inconvenient. Neither the National Park Service nor the city of Philadelphia issued immediate comments following the judge’s decision. This legal action underscores ongoing debates about how American history is presented in public institutions. Advocates argue that preserving accurate historical accounts, including the realities of slavery, is essential for education and understanding. Critics of the exhibit’s removal claim that the previous administration sought to suppress parts of history that challenge a sanitized narrative of the nation’s past. The Philadelphia slavery exhibit has served as a critical educational tool, providing visitors with insight into the lives and struggles of enslaved individuals who lived and worked in the early presidential residence. Its restoration ensures that future visitors can learn about this chapter of American history in a factual and meaningful way. Judge Rufe’s decision could set a precedent for other historic sites and exhibits nationwide, reinforcing legal protections for historically accurate presentations. The case continues as the city of Philadelphia and the federal government navigate the broader legal battle over the exhibit’s permanent status.