Five years have vanished since the smoke cleared from the West Front of the U.S. Capitol, but for the men who stood the line that day, the battle never really ended. It just moved from the concrete tunnels to the courtrooms of D.C. Honestly, it’s a weird situation. Usually, when Congress passes a law to put up a memorial, the memorial goes up. Not this time. Instead, we have a federal lawsuit where officers sue to compel Capitol to install Jan. 6 plaque because the physical piece of bronze—which actually already exists—is reportedly sitting in a storage room surrounded by maintenance equipment.
It feels like a script from a political thriller, but it’s the reality for Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges. They aren't just names in a legal filing; they’re the faces of a growing frustration among law enforcement. They’re basically saying that if the government won't follow its own laws to honor them, the court needs to step in. It’s a messy, high-stakes fight about history, memory, and who gets to decide how we talk about January 6th.
The Plaque That Exists but Can’t Be Seen
Back in March 2022, President Biden signed a law that seemed pretty straightforward. It was part of a larger funding package and it explicitly ordered the Architect of the Capitol to install a plaque. This wasn't supposed to be a decade-long project. The law gave them exactly one year.
That deadline passed in 2023.
Then 2024 came and went.
Now, in early 2026, the plaque is still M.I.A. from the public eye. According to the lawsuit filed by Dunn and Hodges, the plaque has been finished for a long time. It’s done. It’s ready. But it’s stuck in a "Capitol basement utility room." Imagine that—a memorial to the people who protected the seat of American democracy is currently sharing space with mops and spare light bulbs.
The officers argue this isn't just an administrative oopsie. They claim it’s a deliberate attempt to "rewrite history." Their legal team, led by former federal prosecutor Brendan Ballou, is pushing the idea that by keeping the plaque hidden, the government is essentially saying these officers aren't worthy of the recognition the law already granted them.
📖 Related: The Galveston Hurricane 1900 Orphanage Story Is More Tragic Than You Realized
Why the Delay? It’s Complicated (and Political)
House Speaker Mike Johnson has been at the center of the "why hasn't this happened?" question. His office has pushed back, saying the plaque—as it was made—doesn't actually comply with the law.
Here is the technical snag:
The original law asked for a plaque listing the names of the officers who responded.
The current plaque apparently lists the 21 law enforcement agencies that showed up, but not the 3,600+ individual names.
Speaker Johnson’s team argues that because it doesn't have every single name etched into the bronze, it’s "not implementable." Meanwhile, the Department of Justice—now under the Trump administration—is actually moving to dismiss the lawsuit entirely. They’re arguing that the officers haven't suffered a specific enough "injury" just because a plaque isn't on a wall.
It’s a classic D.C. standoff. One side says it’s a technicality; the other says it’s a total lack of respect.
What the Officers Went Through
To understand why this plaque matters so much to the plaintiffs, you have to look at what they’re carrying. Daniel Hodges was the officer famously caught in the crushing force of the tunnel doors. He was diagnosed with major depressive disorder and anxiety adjustment disorder. Harry Dunn, a Black officer who faced a barrage of racial slurs while protecting the building, has had to increase security at his own home due to ongoing death threats.
For them, the plaque isn't just "decor." It’s a validation of their reality. When they see the government dragging its feet, it feels like a second assault.
👉 See also: Why the Air France Crash Toronto Miracle Still Changes How We Fly
The Senate’s Sudden "Rebellion"
In a surprising twist this January, the Senate decided they’d had enough of the waiting. Republican Senator Thom Tillis and Democrats Jeff Merkley and Alex Padilla teamed up to pass a resolution.
They didn't wait for the House.
They didn't wait for the lawsuit to wrap up.
The Senate resolution directs the Architect of the Capitol to "prominently display" the plaque in a publicly accessible location within the Senate wing of the Capitol. It’s basically a temporary home until the bigger fight over the permanent spot on the West Front is settled.
Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, was pretty blunt about it. He noted that while there are "technical implementation problems" regarding the names, we can't just let the memorial vanish. His solution? Put up the plaque honoring the agencies now and create a digital component—like a website—that lists all 3,600 names.
It’s a pragmatic middle ground, but it highlights just how deep the divide is between the House and Senate on this.
What Most People Get Wrong About the Lawsuit
There’s a common misconception that the officers are suing for a massive payday. They aren't. Unlike some of the other lawsuits floating around D.C. right now—like the one from the Proud Boys leaders seeking $100 million—Dunn and Hodges are seeking a court order to get the job done. They want the plaque installed. Period.
✨ Don't miss: Robert Hanssen: What Most People Get Wrong About the FBI's Most Damaging Spy
They aren't looking to get rich. They’re looking for the law to be followed. The lawsuit also brings up a pretty stinging comparison: Congress has managed to find the time and resources to propose bills for renaming airports and putting new faces on currency, yet they can't seem to find a hammer and four screws for a plaque that’s already been paid for.
The Changing Narrative
The lawsuit explicitly mentions that the "politics of January 6 began to change" after the law was first passed. They point to the shift in how the event is described by current leadership. When the narrative changes from "a dark day for democracy" to "a day of love," the physical markers of that day become political landmines.
By filing this suit, the officers are trying to lock in the original version of events—the one that was bipartisan enough to pass a law in the first place.
Actionable Insights and What Happens Next
This legal battle is moving fast, and it’s likely to set a precedent for how much power "mandatory" commemorative laws actually have. If you’re following this story, here’s what to keep an eye on:
- The DOJ’s Motion to Dismiss: If a judge agrees with the Justice Department that the officers don't have "standing" to sue, the case dies. This would mean that "mandatory" laws for memorials are basically suggestions if leadership doesn't like them.
- The Senate Display: Look for the plaque to appear in the Senate wing soon. This will be the first time the public can actually see the "missing" memorial.
- The Digital Registry: Watch for the rollout of the digital list of names. This could be the compromise that finally satisfies the "technical" objections from the Speaker's office.
- Support Replicas: Many House members, led by Rep. Jamie Raskin and others, are hanging replica posters of the plaque outside their offices. This has become a form of "silent protest" within the halls of Congress.
The reality is that a piece of bronze won't heal the divisions in the country. But for the people who were there, it’s a start. It’s a way of saying, "We saw you." Until that plaque moves from the basement to the wall, expect the legal and political pressure to keep mounting. The officers have made it clear: they aren't going to let this be buried in storage.
Check back for updates on the D.C. District Court's ruling on the motion to dismiss, as that will be the next major hurdle for the officers' case.