How the record is built

About the project

Unredacted is a sourced timeline of actions by the second Trump administration that courts, federal watchdogs, UN investigators, lawmakers or independent experts have flagged as unconstitutional, unlawful, corrupt, or possible war crimes, plus measured outcomes such as cases, deaths and prices.

It puts each matter in one place with the reporting and documents behind it, where it stands legally, and the administration's side, so readers can weigh it themselves.

It is run by one independent person. It has no funding, no ads and nothing for sale.

What it is not

• It is not exhaustive. It is a list of the biggest documented flashpoints, not a record of everything contested in this term.
• It does not issue findings of its own. Each entry reports who ruled, found or alleged what.
• Inclusion in The Record does not mean every allegation has been proven.

How entries are selected

To enter The Record, an action by the administration or its officials needs at least one of these, and its stamp says which:

• a court ruling
• an official finding by a government watchdog or a UN inquiry
• a credible, documented allegation of illegality
• a documented harm
• wide, documented criticism

"Wide, documented criticism" means objections from more than one credible, identifiable quarter in the reporting the entry cites, such as lawmakers of both parties, independent legal or subject-matter experts, or nonpartisan watchdogs, not just partisan opponents.

A documented harm is a measured outcome, such as cases, deaths or prices, with a plausible link to policy that the sources support. Those entries are stamped Measured trend. The rule for them is not to claim more about the cause than the sources support.

What is left out

• Rumors and unverified social media posts.
• Single bad-news events with no sourced link to policy. A routine food recall caught by inspectors, for example, is not an administration failure.
• Anything that cannot be tied to a source under the rules below.

These rules are the minimum for inclusion, not a formula. Which matters are big enough to include is an editorial judgment, made under the maintainer's rules as described below.

Inclusion does not establish that an allegation is true or that an action was unlawful. The stamp describes where the matter stands legally, and the entry says who ruled, found or alleged what.

The Record and the Watchlist

The site has two sections, kept separate on purpose.

The Record holds actions that meet the selection rules above.

The Watchlist holds developing stories that credible outlets have reported but that haven't reached a ruling, official finding or documented harm. Developing does not mean rumor. A Watchlist story needs:

• at least two sources from different outlets, and
• a concrete event that would move it to The Record, such as a ruling, charges, an official finding or documented harm. Each entry says what that event is.

Critics' concerns are stated as concerns, and the entry includes the administration's stated reason.

If the watched-for event happens, the story moves to The Record as a full entry with a status stamp. Stories that fizzle or don't hold up are removed. Moves and removals are listed in the change log, and the old link keeps working: it forwards to the new entry or says why the story was removed.

Understanding status stamps

Every entry carries one stamp. These are the same definitions the timeline uses.

Ruled unlawful

A court ruled against it. Some rulings are on appeal.

Official finding

A government watchdog or a UN inquiry found a violation.

Mixed rulings

Courts have ruled both ways on parts of it.

Pending

In court or under criminal investigation right now.

Alleged

Serious, credible accusations of illegality that no court or watchdog has decided yet.

Criticized

Legal, or a policy choice, but widely condemned.

Measured trend

A documented outcome or statistic, not a legal claim. How much of it is caused by administration policy is debated, and each entry says so.

Developing

Watchlist only. Reported by credible outlets, but no ruling, official finding or documented harm yet.

How the stamps differ

• Alleged and Pending. Alleged means serious, credible accusations that no court or watchdog has decided. Pending means the matter is in court or under criminal investigation now. Neither means anything has been proven.
• Preliminary and final rulings. Ruled unlawful covers both. A preliminary ruling, such as a stay or an injunction, is a court's early decision while the case continues. A final ruling decides the case in that court. Where the reporting says so, the entry's "Where it stands" text says which kind it is, which court issued it and whether it is on appeal. The stamp also covers a prosecution that a court dismissed on the merits or over problems with how prosecutors handled it.
• Mixed rulings. Courts have ruled both ways on parts of it. The entry describes each ruling and, where the reporting says so, says when one was preliminary and not a final decision.
• Official finding. A finding by a government watchdog or a UN inquiry. A report by one party's lawmakers or staff is not treated as an official finding: an entry can mention it and says who produced it, but it does not change the stamp.
• Measured trend. A documented outcome or statistic, not a legal claim.

Stamps change

Rulings can be appealed, reversed or put on hold. A stamp reflects the rulings and findings the site could locate, and each entry shows the date its status was last checked. A later ruling that does not decide whether the action was lawful, such as one on who may sue, is described in the entry and may not change the stamp. When the evidence is unclear, an entry gets the weaker status.

A ruling changes the stamp to Ruled unlawful only when the court ruled on the thing the entry is about. A ruling on a related program or a narrower point is added to the entry's text and the stamp stays.

Under the current rule, when a stamp changes because of a new development, the change log records a status change and says what happened. When it changes because the site missed something earlier, the change log records a correction and says what was wrong. Some log items from the site's first days, Oct 1 to 4, 2026, do not make that distinction.

Sources and verification

Every entry links to news reporting, court coverage, or official documents.

• Which sources. Wire services such as the AP and Reuters, major news outlets, court documents, reports by the Government Accountability Office and inspectors general, and official statements are preferred.
• How many. A Record entry needs at least one source, and nearly all have several. A Watchlist entry needs at least two from different outlets.
• What counts. Every substantive factual claim is tied to a source whose text was actually retrieved and read: the page itself, a search result that carries the article's text, or, when a page would not load, text supplied by the maintainer. Nothing is added without one. A headline alone is not treated as a source.
• Wording and numbers. Entries are written in the site's own words, with only short quotations. Figures are given as the source gives them, including qualifiers such as "at least" or "estimated".
• Conflicts. When sources conflict, court records and official documents take priority, the conflict is noted, and when the evidence is unclear an entry gets the weaker status.
• Overstated claims. If a claim that circulates widely is wrong or overstated, the entry says so.
• Developments both ways. A ruling in the administration's favor, or a conviction it won, belongs in the entry too.

The administration's side

Each entry has a section for the administration's side, so readers can weigh it themselves. Where a stated defense could be found, the entry gives it in terms the administration would use. Where none could be found, the entry says what the record shows instead of inventing one.

Check it yourself

Anyone can check an entry by following its links. Check the sources before you share, and share the sources with the claims. Links can break and pages can change: the site does not keep archived copies of its sources.

Dates, updates and corrections

The dates on an entry

Event date

The day of the action itself. For some entries it is the day of the ruling or the measurement. When only the month is known, only the month is shown.

Added

The day the entry was added to the site. Entries with no recorded add or update date were there at launch and say "No change since Sep 30, 2026".

Updated

The day of the entry's last material change: a new status, a new ruling or filing, or a material new fact. Wording fixes do not count.

Checked

The last day the entry was checked for new rulings or developments, normally with one targeted search. It appears on a second line when it is later than the Added or Updated date. Every entry on the site at launch was checked that day, Sep 30, 2026. Later checks found rulings the launch check had missed, and those are logged as corrections.

A check that finds nothing new changes only the Checked date. An update changes the entry and its Updated date. Entries are not checked on a fixed schedule, so the Checked date is the way to tell how current an entry is.

Since Oct 6, 2026, these dates are U.S. Central calendar days. Before that they followed the UTC clock, so a change made in the U.S. evening could carry the next day's date.

What changed

• Update notes. Since Oct 6, 2026, an updated entry carries a short dated note under its opening lines, labeled Updated or Corrected, saying what changed.
• Earlier changes. An entry's own page lists its earlier notes. Updates made from Oct 1 to Oct 5, 2026 are recorded in the change log only, some of them by name only.
• Change log. Changes to the site are listed by date in the change log at the bottom of the timeline: new entries, status changes, corrections, removals and design changes. The log begins Oct 1, 2026. Earlier changes were not logged. The past seven days are also on the weekly page.

Corrections

Corrections are made once they're verified, whichever side they help. A correction says plainly what was wrong. It goes in the change log and, since Oct 6, 2026, on the entry itself.

How AI is used

Research and drafting are done with help from an AI assistant (Claude, made by Anthropic).

In practice, the assistant searches for reporting, rulings and official documents, retrieves and reads the sources, and re-checks statuses. Day to day it applies the rules on this page to decide what is added, how an entry is worded and which stamp it gets, and it drafts the change log. The maintainer sets the rules, decides the cases the assistant flags as uncertain, can overrule any inclusion or stamp, and publishes each update.

Every substantive factual claim is tied to a source whose text was actually retrieved, nothing is added without one, and anyone can check an entry by following its links.

The site does not claim that a person has independently re-read every source behind every entry. AI tools can misread a source. The safeguards are the sourcing rules above, the links on every entry, status re-checks and public corrections. Not every entry has been re-checked since launch, and each entry's Checked date shows when it last was. If an entry does not match its source, please report it.

Data access and sharing

Permanent numbers and links

Exhibit numbers are permanent. A new entry gets the next number even when the event happened earlier, so a number someone cites always points to the same entry. Every entry also has its own page with a permanent address. When a story moves from the Watchlist to The Record or is removed, its old address forwards to the new entry or explains the removal, and its number is not reused.

Download the data

The whole record as one file: each entry's number, date, topic and status, the days it was added, last updated and last checked, its full text, its sources, a link to its page, and its change notes. Watchlist entries are included and marked as developing. The JSON file also carries the full change log.

Download CSV (opens in Excel)Download JSON

The files are rebuilt with every update and hold the current record. Dated snapshots of earlier versions are not published. The change log and the per-entry notes are the record of material changes. Wording-only edits are not listed entry by entry.

Follow updates

See what changed in the past seven days on one page, or follow every change with the RSS feed. The feed is an address for a feed reader: copy the link into one. Opened in a browser, it shows code.

What changed this weekRSS feed

Corrections, tips and contact

Email [email protected] with a link to your source. Reports of these are especially useful:

• a factual error
• a ruling or finding that is missing
• a status that is out of date
• a source link that is broken or no longer says what the entry says
• a defense by the administration that is missing or stated unfairly

Tips without a source can't be added. Corrections are made once they're verified, whichever side they help.