\u201cBecause we’re a rural, poor state, Arkansas really depends on those federal funds to come through, and when the tap gets shut off, services are [also] going to get shut off because [people] can\u2019t afford to pay for them on their own,\u201d Webb says.<\/p>\n
Trump\u2019s Executive Order\u2014and its subsequent effect on the IMLS, and therefore, libraries across the nation\u2014follow a major directive of Trump\u2019s second term in office: cutting down on \u201cwaste\u201d at the federal level.<\/p>\n
Webb says the shifts at the IMLS, though, are just one way in which libraries are being affected by Trump\u2019s return to office, and that librarians are also concerned about wider issues such as the censorship of books. <\/p>\n
Read More<\/strong>: What\u2019s At Stake With The Supreme Court\u2019s LGBTQ+ Schoolbooks Case<\/a><\/p>\n A deeper look at the effects of cuts at the IMLS<\/strong><\/p>\n Trump\u2019s Executive Order shrunk seven federal agencies, including the IMLS, and since then, the majority of the IMLS staff has been placed on administrative leave, according to the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) Local 3403,<\/a> a union representing the IMLS workers. <\/p>\n \u201cEarlier today, the Institute of Museum and Library Services notified the entire staff that they are being placed on administrative leave immediately,\u201d AFGE 3403 said in a statement on March 31. \u201cThe notification followed a brief meeting between DOGE staff and IMLS leadership.\u201d<\/p>\n In early April, the American Library Association<\/a> (ALA) and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the largest union representing museum and library workers, sued the Trump Administration<\/a>, for its IMLS cuts, citing the importance of local libraries as trusted public institutions, and stating that the IMLS\u2019 closure had already caused a domino effect of harm the operations of libraries across the nation.<\/p>\n Cindy Hohl, president of the ALA, says that many of the 125,000 libraries in the nation<\/a> utilize IMLS funding to support things like summer reading programs and translation services. Without the services of the IMLS, she says libraries are already facing \u201chuge challenges\u201d\u2014and she has heard of short-term panic and \u201ctough decisions\u201d being made from librarians who are members of the ALA.<\/p>\n \u201cThe greatest impact to reduction in funding and services will be the small and rural communities across this country,\u201d Hohl says. \u201cHow can any legislators say that small and rural communities don’t need access to the Internet, they don’t need access to public computers, they don’t need access to books and reading?\u201d<\/p>\n IMLS was first created and funded by Congress in 1996 <\/a>and charged with supporting the nation\u2019s libraries and museums. The IMLS awarded $266 million<\/a> in grants and research funding to cultural institutions last year. Hohl says the problem with the federal government kicking this funding of library services from the IMLS down to the states and local governments is that \u201cwe don\u2019t have a comparable model\u201d of the kinds of free services available to communities the way they are in libraries.<\/p>\n She also points to the high approval rates of libraries\u2014 the ALA reports<\/a> that 92% of parents and 90% of voters have favorable opinions of libraries, and that over half of voters<\/a> view public libraries as essential local institutions. She remembers during the COVID-19 pandemic, how libraries were utilized as pick-up sites <\/a>for materials and food, as spaces to apply for benefits and jobs, and as locations for community members to \u201cstay connected to the world around them.\u201d<\/p>\n “That’s why the American Library Association became a co-plaintiff to challenge this Executive Order, because we feel that it is imperative for Americans to understand what is happening right before their eyes,\u201d Hohl says. \u201cWe cannot allow the elimination of libraries in this country, and I do believe that the day that libraries are closed in this country is the day democracy dies.\u201d<\/p>\n And it\u2019s not just the ALA and library-specific advocacy groups who have spoken out against the Trump Administration\u2019s cuts. On April 3, major book publishers Penguin Random House, Hachette Book Group, Macmillan Publishers, Simon & Schuster, and Sourcebooks also submitted a letter <\/a>to Congress advocating for libraries, stating that the gutting of the IMLS \u201cwould leave millions of Americans without access to the books, tools, and other resources required to participate in the modern world.\u201d<\/p>\n Webb says that in Arkansas, the IMLS has been essential in supporting a resource sharing program across the state called Traveler<\/a>. The State Library that gets the money from IMLS for this program was able to buy a large database package\u2014and Webb says that if libraries in Arkansas were to purchase this database individually, it would cost close to $50 million.<\/p>\n \u201cAre you saving taxpayers money? No, you’re saving the federal government that money, but it’s being passed down to the state and local level,\u201d Webb says. \u201cThis is being done in such a haphazard way that it should be really concerning to people across the aisle.\u201d<\/p>\n Africa Hands. an assistant professor in the department of information science at the University at Buffalo, has had her IMLS grant terminated, a grant which funded her research on examining public libraries as an information resource to college bound patrons. Now, she says she\u2019s unsure of how the results of her research will be disseminated to libraries so they can better understand how their work affects high school students and those returning to college.\u00a0<\/p>\n Past her own research, though, she says the IMLS cuts will affect those who utilize libraries, but also those who work in the field of libraries\u2014as staff at local levels begin to get laid off,<\/a> and as those studying to become librarians watch what is occurring at the federal level.<\/p>\n \u201cThink about what it says to future librarians, the folks that I teach, to see all that’s happening in their communities,\u201d Hands says. \u201cIt can be demoralizing for faculty and students to know that their field, their life’s work, is being dismantled. It has a personal, emotional, and mental impact.\u201d <\/p>\n The removal of books at the Department of Defense campuses and wider book censorship<\/strong><\/p>\n Beyond the IMLS, librarians have also been concerned by multiple instances of books being removed from libraries related to the armed forces.<\/p>\n In a January Executive Order titled \u201cEnding Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling,\u201d Trump banned DEI materials in kindergarten through 12th grade education<\/a>, but several military colleges\u2014including West Point and the Naval Academy have taken up these orders. Earlier this year, the Department of Defense (DOD) circulated a memo calling for a review of library books in educational settings for the children of U.S. military personnel and DOD\u2019s civilian employees, according to the Guardian<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n Since then, the U.S. Naval Academy released a list of the books they have removed<\/a> in an effort to remain in accordance with Trump\u2019s measures to \u201cend DEI.\u201d These books include Janet Jacobs\u2019s Memorializing the Holocaust, Ibram X. Kend\u2019s \u201cHow to Be Anti-Racist,\u201d and Maya Angelou\u2019s seminal autobiography, \u201cI Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.\u201d They also removed multiple books related to gender and sexuality.<\/p>\n The academies who have participated in the removal have received backlash from advocates and lawmakers alike, with multiple Democratic representatives sending a letter to the Army, Navy, and Air Force<\/a> on April 7, calling the book removals a \u201cblatant attack on the First Amendment\u201d representing an \u201calarming return to McCarthy-era censorship.\u201d<\/p>\n On April 15, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced<\/a> that they were joining\u00a0 students in Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) schools on military bases to sue the Trump Administration.<\/p>\n \u201cThe implementation of these EOs, without any due process or parental or professional input, is a violation of our children’s right to access information that prevents them from learning about their own histories, bodies, and identities,\u201d said Natalie Tolley, a plaintiff on behalf of her three children in DoDEA schools, in a statement from the ACLU. \u201cI have three daughters, and they, like all children, deserve access to books that both mirror their own life experiences and that act as windows that expose them to greater diversity.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Beyond the censorship at DOD schools, librarians are also concerned with how the new Administration is tackling issues of censorship at the local level. The Department of Education\u2019s Office of Civil Rights announced, via a press release issued on Jan. 24, titled \u201cU.S. Department of Education Ends Biden\u2019s Book Ban Hoax<\/a>,\u201d that they were dismissing complaints of book banning. This came after PEN America released documentation in November 2024 <\/a>stating that there was a \u201cnearly 200% surge in school book bans during the 2023-2024 school year.\u201d<\/p>\n John Chrastka, executive director of EveryLibrary, the national political action committee for libraries, says that he and EveryLibrary have been fighting at the state-level over the last couple of years against censorship laws and book bans, and says he sees states as the \u201claboratory of censorship and discrimination in public and school libraries.\u201d<\/p>\nA woman stands between shelves of the America Memorial Library in Berlin. Christoph Soeder\u2014Getty Images<\/p>\n