[HN Gopher] National Archives to restrict public access starting...
___________________________________________________________________
National Archives to restrict public access starting July 7
Author : LastTrain
Score : 109 points
Date : 2025-06-24 21:18 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.archives.gov)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.archives.gov)
| bennettnate5 wrote:
| Not to be confused with the National Archives _Museum_, where you
| can still readily visit to see important documents such as the
| declaration of independence.
| hooverd wrote:
| I assume they'll be bringing in the heavy-duty shredders.
| jekwoooooe wrote:
| Why?
| LastTrain wrote:
| Who knows, why should they feel obligated to supply any kind of
| rationale for their actions? [edit: /s]Here is the sum total of
| detail they have provided: " All researchers must apply and
| present a researcher card, which may be obtained in Room 1000.
| This ensures that proper identification is on file for all
| individuals accessing the building to establish a legitimate
| business purpose. Abuse of any researcher registration to
| circumvent access by the general public may result in a
| trespass situation and a permanent ban from access to all NARA
| facilities."
| goda90 wrote:
| Every aspect of government should provide the public with
| rationale for its actions unless providing that rationale is
| an actual threat to national security or an individual's
| freedoms. And any time they can't provide rationale for those
| reasons, an independent agency should review them
| confidentially. You can't have government by the people, for
| the people, of the people without accountability.
| whalesalad wrote:
| > why should they feel obligated to supply any kind of
| rationale for their actions?
|
| because it is a public service that we are all funding. why
| would you think anything otherwise?
| LastTrain wrote:
| I keep forgetting what I think of as plainly facetious
| could be someone's actual belief.
| recursivegirth wrote:
| Easier to delete shit if no one can monitor you.
| treetalker wrote:
| Abandon all hope, ye who seek reflective reasoning from this
| government.
|
| But my guess is that less public access to national information
| helps, and does not hinder, a speed-run to autocracy.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| I dunno. I'm very much not a Trump fan, but I don't see how
| restricting access to "national information" would help him.
| And if it would, how does restricting access to _one_ of them
| help him?
|
| I could more see this as being just random action without any
| real purpose, or aimed at petty revenge on someone, or
| something.
| LastTrain wrote:
| Everything they do is meant to sew mistrust. It doesn't
| need to have any other benefit. I don't think they are
| trying to hide anything, and I don't think this is about
| staffing - they just want to wreck government and your
| trust in it.
| treetalker wrote:
| Taking your points in reverse order:
|
| > I could more see this as being just random action without
| any real purpose, or aimed at petty revenge on someone, or
| something.
|
| This was essentially my first point, and I think we are in
| agreement.
|
| > I dunno. I'm very much not a Trump fan, but I don't see
| how restricting access to "national information" would help
| him. And if it would, how does restricting access to one of
| them help him?
|
| I did not intend to claim that the closure necessarily
| helps Trump himself. My point was that reducing access to
| public information (either wholesale, or by placing
| additional hurdles) hurts democracy and favors autocracy.
| recury wrote:
| Staffing cuts, most likely:
| https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2025/06/trump-administrati...
| LastTrain wrote:
| How does adding a new bureaucratic vetting process in room
| 1000 make things more efficient? How does adding additional
| security, as stated, do that?
| cogman10 wrote:
| I think if you take the view of "they just want to shut
| down the central government" you'll get answers to why they
| are doing things.
|
| The first step in killing the national archive is making it
| worthless. Adding extra stupid barriers to access data
| helps with that goal. The harder it is to use, the more
| likely a Coca-cola archive sponsored by taco bell will be
| able to compete.
| relaxing wrote:
| So the administration can decide who gets to conduct research.
| jacobmarble wrote:
| What. The. Fuck.
| simonw wrote:
| This is about "the National Archives at College Park, MD". That's
| one of quite a few facilities they operate:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Archives_at_College...
| dotty- wrote:
| There are multiple 'National Archives' across the country:
| https://www.archives.gov/locations Looks like this only affects
| the one in College Park, MD.
| LastTrain wrote:
| Or this is the first.
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| Can we update the title to _National Archives at College Park, MD
| to restrict public access starting July 7_?
| tehjoker wrote:
| I guess freedom of information is too dangerous to the
| bourgeoisie now.
| ggm wrote:
| I appreciate analogous cases are often not helpful, but in the UK
| some institutions like the national library of scotland are so-
| called "copyright libraries" and they have always restricted
| access to people who register and declare an interest grounded in
| research, or some gatekeeping around legitemate need otherwise.
| In many instances the documents held in these institutions are
| both rare, and contextually unique. Like paleological holotypes
| their role is different to objects on display in museums and
| collections.
|
| I also believe in the general public's right to see and access
| things which relate to government. I'm just trying to point out
| that whilst this probably is reactive to current affairs (cost
| management? risks? FUD?) there are reasons and situations outside
| the USA where this is normal, and I do not mean "has been
| normalised to disadvantage you" -I just mean that identifying who
| you are and why you want to do something isn't that unusual, in
| archive access.
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > in the UK some institutions like the national library of
| scotland are so-called "copyright libraries" and they have
| always restricted access to people who register and declare an
| interest grounded in research
|
| As an 8yo, I'd walk into the US Library of Congress alone and
| ask for rare books.
|
| I like this way best.
| efitz wrote:
| Until some random crazy person exercises the same right and
| destroys an irreplaceable rare book.
|
| You have to get a library card for the library. I don't see
| why there is so much outrage over this, and I think the
| timing is more about budget cuts than about Trump [caveat-
| firing the archivist might have been personal].
|
| I find the arguments that "he just wants to sow distrust"
| etc. are completely unbelievable; he has bigger fish to fry
| than micromanaging the national archives.
| caseysoftware wrote:
| It's normal in the US too.. the Library of Congress has
| required it for certain collections for decades (that I know
| of):
|
| https://www.loc.gov/research-centers/use-the-library/researc...
| efitz wrote:
| I was surprised when I saw this article and realized that
| until now anyone could just walk in off the street.
| gardnr wrote:
| Looks like NARA are underfunded [1] and trying to grapple with
| how to prioritize digital transformation while still meeting KTLO
| demands. They closed three facilities last year. [2] The goal
| was/is to digitize everything to increase access to the archives
| for everyone.
|
| The current administration reduced NARA funding and, in February,
| dismissed Shogan as "Archivist of the United States" but it
| appears a plan for a strategic shift was underway before those
| changes.
|
| 1: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/foia-audit/foia/2024-03-15/us-
| nati...
|
| 2: https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2024/nr24-37
| IvyMike wrote:
| From the site:
|
| > All researchers must apply and present a researcher card, which
| may be obtained in Room 1000. This ensures that proper
| identification is on file for all individuals accessing the
| building to establish a legitimate business purpose. Abuse of any
| researcher registration to circumvent access by the general
| public may result in a trespass situation and a permanent ban
| from access to all NARA facilities.
|
| What the hell does "legitimate business purpose" mean? What
| "business" need is there for JFK Assassination records (which I
| think are at this site), for example? If I'm getting a PHD or
| writing a book, is that a "business" need? I suspect not.
|
| Also, "Abuse of any researcher registration to circumvent access
| by the general public may result in a trespass situation and a
| permanent ban from access to all NARA facilities" seems like a
| very poorly constructed sentence.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-24 23:00 UTC)