Federal employees across Washington reportedly entered a state of administrative distress this week after yet another court battle over executive authority left agencies facing an unfamiliar requirement: reading the Constitution before writing new rules.
The emergency reportedly began moments after several departments discovered that "because we've always done it this way" was no longer recognized as binding constitutional precedent.
"It's honestly terrifying," said acting Deputy Assistant Associate Director of Procedural Continuity Marjorie Feldman while carefully placing a bookmark into Article II for the first time. "We've spent decades developing regulations based on feelings, flowcharts, and mandatory webinars. Now people expect us to know what the document actually says."
Witnesses say panic spread quickly through federal office buildings as employees attempted to determine whether the Constitution came with an appendix explaining how to ignore the inconvenient parts.
Several agencies immediately launched emergency "Constitution Equity Teams" to ensure every clause was interpreted in a manner that wouldn't interrupt existing paperwork.
One anonymous official admitted morale had fallen dramatically.
"We became bureaucrats because paperwork is forever," he sighed. "Nobody warned us elected presidents might eventually expect to supervise executive agencies."
The National Association of Administrative Professionals reportedly requested billions in emergency funding to purchase highlighters, sticky notes, and emotional support librarians.
Meanwhile, constitutional scholars found themselves receiving unexpected invitations to government meetings after years of being treated like relatives who only appear during Thanksgiving arguments.
"We're cautiously optimistic," one professor explained. "For years they quoted us only when we agreed with them. Now they're asking where the separation of powers chapter actually begins."
Private contractors quickly capitalized on the confusion by marketing a deluxe "Constitution for Busy Bureaucrats" featuring color-coded tabs labeled "Congress," "President," and "Things We Probably Should Have Checked Earlier."
Lobbyists objected immediately, arguing that such organization could create dangerous efficiency.
Media analysts also struggled to adjust.
Several cable commentators spent hours explaining that constitutional limits are either the cornerstone of democracy or an unprecedented threat to democracy, depending entirely on which party currently occupies the White House.
One network reportedly solved the inconsistency by replacing every legal analyst with a weather forecaster.
"The constitutional climate remains partly cloudy with scattered outrage," the meteorologist confidently announced.
Congress reacted in predictable fashion by scheduling seven hearings, authorizing three investigations, and issuing forty-two fundraising emails before lunch.
Lawmakers from both parties agreed on one bipartisan principle: none of this should interfere with campaign messaging.
As Washington prepared for another round of legal arguments, maintenance crews reportedly discovered thousands of unopened Constitution booklets sitting in government storage rooms, still sealed in their original packaging.
Officials say they plan to distribute them immediately—just as soon as a committee finishes writing regulations explaining how to read them.
