A Timeline and Update on the Institute for Museum and Library Services
We are a little over two months into the dismantling of the only federal agency dedicated to libraries, and the news has been coming at a pace no one could keep up with.
This week, there have been several updates to what’s happening at the Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS). Unfortunately, even the most tuned in library-related news outlets have slowed in their coverage, and those which have done their best to report on the ever-evolving story seem to be leaving out some crucial details. Two of the details not being highlighted or bolded enough: the cruelty of the current Acting Director toward his staff and the reality that even if one of the two lawsuits requires that IMLS be returned to its pre-March 13 operations, it will only apply to some of the country.
This isn’t to place blame on any outlet or organization. It’s instead intended to emphasize how fast and how convoluted this situation is.
Let’s begin with a timeline, then catch up on the latest updates. Note that this is exclusive to the library side of IMLS, even though the agency also covers public museums. That same caveat applies in talking about one of the lawsuits, Rhode Island vs. Trump, which covers not just the IMLS but two other federal agencies.
A Timeline of the IMLS Gutting
March 14, 2025: Trump issues an Executive Order targeting the IMLS. The agency is to be reduced to its statutory functions.
March 20, 2025: The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) entered the IMLS. DOGE attempted to fire staff, but none left. Keith Sonderling is installed as the acting Director of the agency. A press release from the IMLS states its new purpose is “steering this organization in lockstep with this Administration to enhance efficiency and foster innovation. We will revitalize IMLS and restore focus on patriotism, ensuring we preserve our country’s core values, promote American exceptionalism and cultivate love of country in future generations.”
March 24, 2025: The National Museum and Library Services Board sent Sonderling a letter outlining the roles and obligations of IMLS.
March 31, 2025: All of the IMLS staff are told that they’re being put on “administrative leave” for up to 90 days. Their work would be halted, and they would have no access to their email. Staff were allowed back into the office the next day to retrieve their things and 12 staff members were recalled to the job. Later that week, staff were informed that AD positions would have only two weeks of administrative leave, while the rest of the staff would have 30 days. The speed to remove staff was much quicker than other agencies.
April 2, 2025: Grant recipients started to get letters from the IMLS that their funding was being terminated because their projects were inconsistent with the new IMLS priorities (aka: not propaganda, not whitewashed lies about history). Three states–Connecticut, California, and Washington–were told all of their IMLS funding was being pulled, despite this funding being a statutory part of the agency. It would later be made clear the reason these states lost their funding was because their applications had the word “equity” in them.
April 3, 2025: The National Museum and Library Services Board sends a second letter to Sonderling, demanding answers to a number of questions, including whether or not there was any staff left at the IMLS. The board was then fired. Don’t worry–DOGE also informed IMLS their jobs would be permanently terminated May 4. The IMLS social media feeds are also taken over and used to spread mis- and dis- information about the agency and its grant recipients.
April 4, 2025: 21 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over the destruction of the IMLS. This case is referred to as Rhode Island vs. Trump.
April 7, 2025: The American Library Association (ALA) and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) file a lawsuit against Keith Sonderling. This case is referred to as ALA vs. Sonderling.
April 9 and April 10, 2025: Tribal libraries across the country being receiving notice they will lose their grant funding from the IMLS. Over the next several days, more organizations will share that they’ve lost funding for their services. This leads to Maine State Library declaring that they’ll need to lay off 13 staff members.
April 10, 2025: Plaintiffs in ALA vs. Sonderling file for a preliminary injunction.
April 18, 2025: The first motion hearing in Rhode Island vs. Trump. The Judge, John J. McConnell, Jr., pretty openly expressed frustration toward the defense, who offered no evidence for their actions.
April 21, 2025: Keith Sonderling sends a letter out to all State Libraries demanding information about what they are using their Grants to States money for and how they are planning on celebrating America 250.
April 30, 2025: The first hearing for ALA vs. Sonderling is held in federal court.
May 1, 2025: Judge Richard J. Leon granted a temporary restraining order in the case of ALA vs. Sonderling. This was a really important move, as it helped to ensure the jobs on the line to be cut May 4 would not be able to be proceed quite yet. The restraining order means that no further damage could be done to the IMLS until there is a ruling in this case (in theory–we know this administration doesn’t care about legality).
May 1, 2025: Grant holders begin to see letters reinstating their awards.
May 2, 2025: The Trump Budget proposal for 2026 completely eliminates funding for IMLS, rendering it a dead agency. If this budget were to pass, it would go into effect October 1, 2025. This is an important date and move in the IMLS situation. These court cases may be rendered moot if the Trump administration can keep them in the courts for a few more months.
May 6, 2025: Judge John J. McConnell issued and injunction and denied a stay by the defense in the Rhode Island vs. Trump case. He implied quite heavily that this lawsuit was going to go in favor of the plaintiffs.
May 13, 2025: Judge John J. McConnell rules in favor of the state attorneys general in the Rhode Island vs. Trump case. The ruling requires that the Trump administration undo all of the damage wrought to the IMLS so far, including calling back all employees, reinstating grants, and halting future dismembering. This was a massive win, though as you’ll see below, there are a number of things worth addressing in this ruling. The defendants are to respond with how they’re meeting their obligations in the case in the following week.
May 16, 2025: Trump’s legal team issues a notice that they plan to appeal the decision in Rhode Island vs. Trump.
May 20, 2025: The administration seeks a stay in the injunction ordered in Rhode Island vs. ALA while the case is being appealed. There are several things going on here. First, this would mean the administration doesn’t need to follow any of the judge’s orders for restoring the IMLS until the outcome of the appeal is known. And while the temporary restraining order in the other lawsuit means that Trump cannot carry on with dismantling the IMLS, let’s remember that the law doesn’t mean anything to him or his team–this stay would likely allow continued dismantling.
May 20, 2025: Keith Sonderling submits a declaration in the appeal. Take a look through and see just how much disdain this agency leader has for the agency and its workers. None is surprising, but seeing it spelled out in a legal document is sure something.
May 20, 2025: The Trump administration files a status report in the Rhode Island vs. Trump case. This gives an update on what actions the defendants have taken to meet the obligations of the ruling. In other words, here’s what they say they’ve done to meet the requirements of the ruling.
May 21, 2025: Administration filed a motion for a stay of the injunction in Rhode Island v. Trump in appellate court. This is on hold while the district court decides the stay motion.
May 23, 2025: The judge in the ALA vs. Sonderling case proposed an extension of the temporary restraining order while evaluating the decision in the case of Widakuswara vs. Lake. The Plaintiffs were fine with this. The Trump administration has filed an objection.
May 27, 2025: Plaintiffs in Rhode Island v. Trump file response to stay motion in district court.
May 27, 2025: Defendants in Rhode Island v. Trump file for an “administrative” stay in appellate court. That “administrative” stay has been denied.
May 29, 2025: Plaintiffs in ALA vs. Sonderling filed a response to the administration’s request to extend the temporary restraining order in the case.
Right now, one of the biggest pieces in the puzzle is what the ruling will be in the ALA vs. Sonderling case. If it is in favor of the plaintiffs–which is likely–there is little doubt the administration will file another appeal. A decision in this case was anticipate before the end of May, but as of May 22, it appears there might now be a delay in that decision.
It’s a battle of what we’ll learn about whatever federal budget passes, how that impacts the IMLS’s future, and how long these two cases will be tied up in the very busy court system.
A Few Crucial Points
There are a handful of important notes to make about what might happen and how things with the IMLS and its grants might look following these two lawsuits. I don’t want to belabor this too much because so much could happen–just as much as so much could simply not happen by law or by intentional undermining of that law. However, it’s worth addressing that:
Whatever the outcome in Rhode Island vs. Trump, the 29 states who didn’t have their attorney general as part of the lawsuit are out of luck. Canceled grants would only be reinstated to recipients in the lawsuit class.
The states involved in the lawsuit are Rhode Island, New York, Hawaii, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin. What you’ll notice is that states most dependent on IMLS funds because they are more rural are not included here. These states, already poised to be the most hurt by the cuts at the IMLS, will continue to be the most damaged if the case’s outcome is positive. In fact, three of the states not mentioned here–Arkansas, New Hampshire, and South Dakota–attempted to dismantle their own state libraries this year. IMLS Grants to States flow through state libraries, so such dismantling would mean there is no way for federal money to reach those states anyway. All of that is to say keep an eye out for more legislation next session trying to kill state libraries . . . and where and how the IMLS’s new leadership will be eager by those developments.
IMLS employees are beginning to return to work. The requirement of being in-office and the requirements of some of the employees who are unionized has made their return a bit staggered. If a stay is reached in the Rhode Island appeal, who knows if this will continue to be the case. Right now because of the rulings in both cases, these employees cannot be permanently terminated.
Sonderling has utter disdain for the agency and its workers. If things go the way we all want them to and the agency is returned to its pre-March 13 operations, anticipate a lot of resistance, as well as exhaustion and burnout, from inside the IMLS. The propaganda machine is already in full force, and it will be a requirement the administration makes of its employees. Although what I’m about to write will feel tangential to this, it’s not–recall that in 2022, the Patmos Library in Jamestown, Michigan, was defunded twice after bigots began a campaign about a tiny handful of LGBTQ+ books in the library they hated. It got its funding back the following year. Just last week, though, now a year and a half out from getting that funding back, the library had to close. Why? Because five staff members quit over how they’ve been treated and abused, especially by the library board (and who can blame them this many years into a nightmare?). This isn’t going to be a one-off. It’s going to be the goal, including at IMLS.
In addition to the IMLS needing to be funded by the federal budget in 2026, there’s another key factor related to the future of the institution. Congress needs to reauthorize the Museum and Library Services Act of 2018 by September 30, as its 6-year authorization cycle ends at the end of this fiscal year. Only Congress can do this, and if they don’t, the institution will no longer be active. This bill, when introduced and passed in 2018, was seen as proof that the IMLS and libraries were a legislative priority. Are they now in 2025? Depends which party you ask.
And none of this addresses what’s been going on at the Library of Congress, where Trump fired both Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden and the Register of Copyrights, Shira Perlmutter.
Seeking Some Further Insight
I want to end this not with another roundup of the same suggestions for what you can do to stop this. It’s exhausting to type the same things over and over for years on end. Write your representatives at the federal and state level about this. Demand more funding and protection for libraries, providing data that is readily available about how these institutions have incredible meaning in community (and unbelievable return on investment). Show up to the polls and board meetings. Get on the phone and/or inboxes of your state attorney general and either applaud their efforts or chide them for being cowards. So on and so on, as has been the same call to action since 2021, when we had far more reason to believe these efforts would do something.
What I’m interested in is building a more collaborative timeline of IMLS events. Whether or not this will be successful, I have no idea, but one thing I think would be helpful is to hear from those directly impacted by these cuts. I’d love the stories of letters received, of funds cut, of the immediate and anticipated long-term effects of these cuts. I’d like them on a timeline to see just how swift all of this happened, as well as how deeply harmful the on-again, off-again nature of this will be for the long run.
So here’s the ask, and I know that the outcome might ultimately be nothing. That’s fine. I’d like to have anyone impacted by IMLS cuts on the library side share their story on the timeline. I am especially interested in hearing from libraries whose stories are often secondary or missed in the coverage, including tribal libraries and prison libraries.
To do this, I’ve copied the timeline above into a Google Doc that is able to be edited by anyone. If you’ve been directly impacted by IMLS cuts–your state lost its Grant to States money, you lost a grant yourself, your state cut access to a database on x-date because they did not get their grant funding, etc.–can you write that on the timeline with a data and any accompanying documentation you feel comfortable sharing? You are welcome to edit out any personally identifying information, of course, and if you have local news coverage, linking to that is especially helpful. My only real ask is that you include your personal additions in a color other than black text so it’s clearer to those who open or peruse the document what it is they’re seeing.
As an example, you may have received a grant termination letter dated March 24, 2025. On the timeline using a color other than black, you might write “IMLS grant project about the history of Black librarianship in Los Angeles terminated” and include either a link to a press release, news story, and/or linked screen shot of the letter, if comfortable.
If you’ve not been personally affected by the IMLS cuts but know someone who has or may know someone who has, you can absolutely pass this along to them. I see it as a living record and one that I’ll continue to update where and as I can.
The publicly-editable document is available here: A Timeline of IMLS Cuts, Lawsuits, Impact to Libraries, and More