On March 14, 2025, President Donald Trump issued an executive order (EO) with immediate consequences for the nation’s libraries. EO 14238, “Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy,” called for the elimination of seven government agencies—notably, the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), the federal agency dedicated to funding library services. With it, the administration moved to dismiss dozens of agency workers and to cut off at the knees one of the most trusted of American institutions. Librarians and their communities received this news with no clear answer about what would come next, leading to a period of uncertainty and, ultimately, resilience.

A federal judge ultimately blocked the executive order, and on April 6, the Trump Administration withdrew its appeal of that ruling. Congress not only continued funding for the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA)—the primary vehicle through which IMLS money reaches communities—but increased it. The American Library Association (ALA) has since launched its annual Fund Libraries campaign, pushing members of Congress to sign bipartisan letters supporting funds for libraries in 2027. But library leaders say the fight is far from over.

The fight has since intensified, with the White House release of its Fiscal Year 2027 budget proposal—one that zeroes out funding entirely for both IMLS and the school library program Innovative Approaches to Literacy (IAL). The proposal follows a pattern that began during the president’s first term, when he proposed eliminating IMLS in four consecutive budget cycles. ALA leadership responded swiftly, noting that the president’s intentions for IMLS were clear from the outset and that the FY27 budget is a continuation of that effort. “The president has repeatedly underestimated congressional support for libraries,” ALA stated, pointing out that Congress increased library funding all four years of the president’s first term.

A LIFELINE MANY NEVER KNEW EXISTED

Currently funded at $212.5 million, LSTA grants flow to every state, funding services most patrons never connect to federal dollars. These include early literacy programs, high-speed internet access, employment assistance, Braille and talking books for people with visual impairments, workforce training, and small business support. While this funding amounts to a minuscule fraction of the federal budget, for many libraries LSTA is not a supplement. It is infrastructure.

This is nowhere more visible than in small and rural communities across the United States, where for many the public library is a key institution offering free internet access, job training, and more. “IMLS has always been such a great support to libraries—we get funding from them, but they're really just supportive of us as well,” said Theresa Quiner, director of the Kuskokwim Consortium Library in rural Alaska and president of the Alaska Library Association. “I work in a really small library. We get a Native American Library Services basic grant—it’s only $10,000, but a small grant like that is a pretty important part of the budget for a small library.”

For some libraries, non-LSTA grants—including grants from individual states—have provided a safety net at a time when crucial federal funding feels unreliable. Teressa Williams, Tuzzy Consortium library director in Utqiagvik, AK, used funds from a state public library assistance grant to ensure continuity for staffing after an IMLS grant terminated in 2025. “We did not want to lose staff, we did not want to close any branches,” she said, and noted that while she is “feeling optimistic about the next [federal] award,” there is “always that shred of fear” about impacts to federal funding that could have an enormous effect on her community and others like it.

Quiner was direct about the broader damage caused by the uncertainty post–executive order: “A lot of panic. We just didn’t know” if or when essential funding would come through. For Quiner, one visible casualty was Alaska’s statewide book-by-mail program, delivering materials to residents of communities across a state so vast that most of its communities have no public library at all. “That program was closed,” she said, due to uncertainty about grant continuity. “It hasn’t restarted.” In a state where not all communities have reliable internet, she said, “electronic services do not replace physical books by mail.”

THE YEAR OF UNCERTAINTY

Even after the court ruling, relief was tempered by caution. Grants were delayed. Partnerships stalled. Hiring freezes set in at systems that depended on federally funded positions.

ALA President Sam Helmick described the toll the uncertainty took on institutions across the country. “Particularly at the state level, museums, universities, and libraries that were waiting to confirm that the relinquishment of grant dollars would come through—that was something devastating,” Helmick said. “To not be certain in the word of your federal government. It felt like the floor fell from under them.”

Few state libraries felt that uncertainty as acutely—or moved as swiftly to prepare for the worst—as Maine. Maine State Librarian Lori Stockman was among the first state library leaders to publish a plan of action following the executive order, and ultimately lost staff members and library services in its wake.

From the moment the order was issued, Stockman made communication a priority. “During the period between the executive order in March and DOGE [Department of Government Efficiency] coming to IMLS, I made sure to keep my staff informed on a weekly basis, even if it were just ‘I don't know any more this week,’” she said. “I made a point to be upfront and honest with them.”

In the end, the Maine State Library laid off eight staff members, some of whom had been with the agency for decades. The state retrenched its books-by-mail service, reducing the number of people served, and was forced to close its physical location owing to lack of staff—pivoting instead to curbside pickup and reference services by appointment. Yet even as she reckons with those losses, Stockman remains focused on what comes next. “We are doing what I call ‘scenario positioning,’” she said, “which means that we are trying to position ourselves to weather whatever comes our way, keeping at the forefront of our mind the priority of continuity of service.” She added: “I do think we have refined our focus as an institution as far as our priorities. And I think that makes us stronger than ever going forward.”

INNOVATION AT RISK

To library professionals and those they serve, libraries are not simply book repositories. IMLS-backed programs have seeded initiatives that became national models, including digital fabrication labs, early literacy partnerships with pediatricians, re-entry programs for people leaving incarceration, and workforce training that has retrained thousands of displaced workers.

Helmick warned that the adverse effect extends beyond any single budget line. “The idea that libraries couldn’t even depend on already meager funding adds an additional chilling effect on innovation and growth—and these are institutions already trying to operate on minimal budgets,” Helmick said.

The threat is not limited to funding cuts alone. For some projects, the concern is about what IMLS will still support. Rebecca Moorman, president-elect of the Alaska Library Association and head of technical services at the UAA/APU Consortium Library at the University of Alaska Anchorage, has been principal investigator on a project since 2021 to create a controlled vocabulary of Alaska Native names. When Moorman looked to IMLS directly for future funding, the revised grant guidelines gave her pause. “Because our project centers the concepts of diversity, equity, and inclusion, it no longer feels like a project that meets the revised IMLS guidelines,” she said, pointing to language in the FY26 National Leadership Grants for Libraries notice encouraging institutions that “promote a positive and uplifting vision of American history and our shared national achievements” to apply—framing she described as “very chilling.”

A CONSTITUENCY THAT FOUND ITS VOICE

One of the more unexpected developments of the past year has been the emergence of a newly activated advocacy movement. ALA mobilized nearly 200 advocates for Capitol Hill meetings, operating on three fronts simultaneously: challenging the executive order itself, supporting funding already promised to states and institutions, and keeping pressure on Congress to protect future IMLS budgets.

Susan Hempstead, assistant director of strategic relations at Sno-Isle Libraries in Washington State and chair of ALA’s Committee on Legislation, told LJ, “when I reflect on what has occurred in the past year—it has been hard, collaborative advocacy work. And at every level, library stories were shared.” That approach, Hempstead said, has opened the door for a new generation of advocates. “This moment has created the opportunity for new library advocates. If you talk about your library story and the story as the strategy, it’s approachable. People want to come out and share their library story and it’s making a huge difference.”

Now, with the FY27 budget proposal zeroing out IMLS and IAL entirely, the stakes have escalated further. ALA has described the budget as part of a pattern of sustained attacks on library funding—one the association says it is prepared to fight. “ALA members have a solid track record of defeating the president’s threats,” it stated, “but we do not underestimate the lengths to which he will go to undercut support for America’s libraries.” Already this year, thousands of advocates have emailed and called their members of Congress in support of federal library funding, and ALA members are actively asking their senators to sign letters of support for IMLS and IAL.

Helmick offered a clear-eyed assessment of where the movement must go. “Funding is an intellectual freedom issue,” they said. “If we cannot afford ebooks, cannot afford to put books on shelves, cannot afford the staff—intellectual freedom doesn't even have an opportunity. It’s been hard to play defense. But it’s also an opportunity to play joyful offense.” Helmick’s challenge to the public was direct: “More Americans are realizing we are at a precipice. It’s our time as a generation to involve ourselves and to boldly step forward. Liberty cannot defend itself.” For thousands of libraries and the millions of Americans who walk through their doors every year, rising to this occasion could not matter more.