A look at federal library policy in 2025, and work to be done in the coming year

I knew that 2025 would be a bad year for federal public policy for libraries. However, I did not anticipate the Trump Administration’s widespread and blatant violations of federal law and the U.S. Constitution regarding library interests. In response, we saw multiple lawsuits in federal court. Rising to the challenge were federal judges who generally overruled these unlawful initiatives, at least temporarily. Hooray for our federal courts and judges whom I recognize as the heroes of library advocacy in 2025. In particular, the federal judiciary weighed in for libraries in three key cases: for the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), the U.S. Copyright Office, and the Universal Service Fund (USF).

IMLS

Executive Order 14238 (Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy) and the provision in the President’s FY26 budget proposal to shutter IMLS were not surprising developments in 2025. However, the abrupt and illegal placement of IMLS employees on administrative leave and widespread cancellation of grants were shocking.

Two lawsuits were brought against the Trump Administration regarding IMLS. The American Library Association (ALA) and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) brought suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. This suit seeks to reverse the actions taken by the Trump Administration and thus restore IMLS employees and grantees to their status prior to March 31, 2025. A second suit was filed by 21 state attorneys general in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island. This second suit seeks comparable relief, though for three federal agencies in addition to IMLS that were also implicated in EO 14238.

Federal courts ruled for libraries! In the ALA & AFSCME suit, U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon issued a Temporary Restraining Order on May 1, 2025, finding that “[t]he wholesale termination of grants and services and mass layoffs of employees appears to violate the clear statutory mandates outlined in the MLSA [Museum and Library Services Act].”

And in the suit brought by the state attorneys general, U.S. District Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr., issued a preliminary injunction. The first paragraph of his May 6, 2025, memorandum and order succinctly summarizes matters: “Once again, this Court is confronted with a legal challenge by various states, against an Executive Order that attempts to dismantle congressionally sanctioned agencies and ignores congressionally appropriated funds. Here, the targeted federal agencies support our libraries, museums, minority business enterprises, and the well-respected federal mediation services. This Executive Order violates the Administrative Procedures Act (‘APA’) in the arbitrary and capricious way it was carried out. It also disregards the fundamental constitutional role of each of the branches of our federal government; specifically, it ignores the unshakable principles that Congress makes the law and appropriates funds, and the Executive implements the law Congress enacted and spends the funds Congress appropriated.”

While this language is sober (and favorable!), I detect a distinct tone of annoyance—the Court has had to adjudicate a case about developments that never should have happened in the first place. On November 21, 2025, Judge McConnell granted the motion for summary judgment, including a permanent injunction, in favor of the plaintiffs, further strengthening the position of IMLS and libraries.

Both of the cases remain pending in federal court and deliberations, including expected appeals, will likely continue well into 2026.

U.S. COPYRIGHT OFFICE

In May, President Trump terminated Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden and no formal challenge was brought against that action. When the President also attempted to terminate Shira Perlmutter, the Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office (which is within the Library of Congress), she filed suit, arguing that the President does not have the authority to fire her. Trump further attempted to install acting officials to lead both the Library of Congress and Copyright Office, but pushback from the Library of Congress and some Congressmembers seemingly rebuffed that action. Robert Newlen, Principal Deputy Librarian of Congress, continues to run the Library of Congress—for now.

On September 10, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued an interlocutory injunction to restore Perlmutter as the Register of Copyrights. In October, the Trump Administration appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to overrule this restoration (to stay the injunction). Meanwhile, the case continues in district court.

UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND

The E-rate program provides subsidies for broadband-related expenses for public libraries and K–12 schools. Administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as a program of the USF, the E-rate program’s constitutionality was challenged by a small government advocacy group. Plaintiff Consumers’ Research alleged that the collection of the fees that support the USF constitute a tax that is not properly mandated by Congress and thus violates the U.S. Constitution. This case made it up to the U.S. Supreme Court in FCC v. Consumers’ Research. In June 2025, the high court ruled 6–3 that the USF mechanism as implemented is indeed constitutional.

2026: LOOKING AHEAD

I see further unfavorable and probably unlawful initiatives against library interests in 2026. Thus, new actions in federal court will likely be needed, in addition to the ongoing cases. Note that federal courts can only respond to a suit, so the onus is on plaintiffs to bring one—and so the burden is on the library community to lawyer up, file, and sustain engagement. Technically, the courts are not “advocates,” of course, but the last defense of laws and the Constitution.

There have been positive developments in the U.S. Congress, which may surprise some. The continuing resolution for the federal budget enacted on November 12, 2025, included full-year FY26 funding for both the Library of Congress and Government Publishing Office (which includes the Federal Depository Library Program) with close to flat funding as compared to FY25—good news in the current political environment. And the appropriations bills pending in the House and Senate both propose approximately flat funding for IMLS for FY26, in contrast to the zeroing-out in the President’s FY26 budget proposal.

It is essential to continue advocacy with Congressional offices to maintain this positive library position. Library advocates and community stakeholders can make the difference by reinforcing the message of how libraries advance communities and how an investment in libraries brings much greater returns because of the wide range of valuable programs and services that they provide. Even officials who have been strongly supportive of libraries need to be reminded—they are likely strongly supportive of many other priorities too, such as education, health, transportation, etc., so libraries compete against those other priorities.

An important task for the coming year is developing and agreeing upon a strategy and vision for the time when the policy environment is more favorable for libraries—such as, hopefully, in 2029. The field will need a substantive and compelling policy vision beyond merely reversing the current negative policy initiatives. Such ideas would ideally be disseminated and debated in policy circles in 2027, making it possible for them to be, ideally, incorporated into the political and campaign plans developed in 2028. Thus, 2026 is the prime time for brainstorming, producing white papers, and holding convenings.

Given the record of the first year of this Trump Administration, I am admittedly ambivalent and anxious about library interests in 2026. However, there is evidence that the situation is not hopeless—in fact, far from that. There are strong allies fighting for the public interest and the rule of law, such as Democracy Forward. The library community can lay out both a positive strategy and a vision for a better future. We need to continue and strengthen our efforts in the months ahead, knowing that eventually “this too shall pass.”

Alan S. Inouye is the principal of The Policy Connection, based in Washington, DC. Previously, he was head of public policy and advocacy for the American Library Association; a coordinator of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology; and a study director for the National Academy of Sciences.