Ruling decisively in favor of 21 states’ attorneys general, Rhode Island district court judge John J. McConnell Jr. formally ordered a halt on May 13 to a presidential executive order dismantling the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) and two more federal agencies.

The court order instructs the defendants—among them IMLS acting director Keith Sonderling, secretary of commerce Howard Lutnick, Office of Management and Budget director Russell Vought, and President Donald Trump—to cease efforts to eliminate IMLS, the Minority Business and Development Agency (MBDA), and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS). Per the judge, compliance also involves restoring employees and contractors who were “involuntarily placed on leave or involuntarily terminated” and resuming “the processing, disbursement, and payment of already-awarded funding,” including grants that are in limbo or canceled.

The order follows McConnell’s May 6 memorandum, which gave his reasoning for a preliminary injunction. In the memorandum, the judge wrote that the defendants’ actions in the implementation of the order are unconstitutional and violate the Administrative Procedure Act, the Take Care Clause, and the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of the federal government. The defendants now have seven days to file a status report confirming “full compliance with” the court order.

Attorneys for the defense wrote to the judge on May 9 that, because an order would require “sweeping relief across various agencies” and because “access to technology and office space may delay complete implementation,” seven days would not be adequate to comply. The judge imposed that timeline nevertheless. In his May 13 order, McConnell wrote in no uncertain terms that defendants “must promptly take all necessary steps to reverse any policies, memoranda, directives, or actions issued before this Order, that were designed or intended, in whole or in part, to implement, give effect to, comply with, or carry out the directives contained” in the order.

New York state attorney general Letitia James hailed the decision as a significant win for those who depend on IMLS, MBDA, and FMCS. “These agencies provide critical support to help minority-owned businesses, protect workers’ rights, and make sure our libraries and museums continue to serve our communities,” James wrote in a statement. "The administration’s attack on these agencies is illegal, and today we put a stop to it. I will continue to fight back against this administration’s chaos and destruction of basic services that New Yorkers depend on.”

In a statement to PW, Rhode Island attorney general Peter F. Neronha added, "This order tells the Trump administration, in no uncertain terms, that it must immediately end the dismantling of these important agencies and resume the disbursement of allocated funding."

New York, Rhode Island, and Hawaii are the lead plaintiffs in the suit, joined by states’ attorneys general from Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.

"Americans have grown weary of their government attacking them instead of working for them," continued attorney general Neronha. "Above all else, as attorneys general, we have an obligation to protect the residents of our states from harm even when, perhaps especially when, it comes from the federal government. With this order and many others, we are stopping this President in his tracks, and we will continue to fight every single step of the way.”

In the public interest

Hours after the order in the Rhode Island District Court, plaintiffs in ALA v. Sonderling requested a preliminary injunction of their own. In their request, they compared their IMLS-related lawsuit to cases including American Federation of Government Employees v. Trump and Rhode Island v. Trump, which, they argued, found an injunction “in the public interest” and underscored “the importance of the federal government following its own laws.”

Judge Richard J. Leon of the district court of the District of Columbia issued a “narrow” temporary restraining order in ALA v. Sonderling on May 1, pausing a planned reduction in force at IMLS. Attorneys for the defense asked judge Leon to reconsider, and the plaintiffs—the American Library Association and American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees—have now responded and supplied additional evidence.

ALA and AFSCME provided a declaration from ALA associate executive director of public policy and advocacy Lisa Varga, who testified that all six of ALA’s grants have been terminated by IMLS, and another declaration from an IMLS staffer, who writes under the pseudonym Alex Albright for fear of reprisal. Albright gave insight into the current state of affairs at the IMLS office, declaring that as of May 13, approximately eight IMLS employees have been fired, about 57 remain on leave, and 10–11 remain active. In addition, Albright said, IMLS leadership told current active staff that IMLS will be moved into the Department of Labor’s office building in early June and given only enough space to accommodate a dozen or so employees.

Albright also shed some light on interruptions to the 2025 grant application process. In late April, when IMLS was scheduled to begin reading submissions for its competitive awards, political personnel told IMLS program staff “to cherry-pick a select few grant applications to fund” and avoid topics including diversity, inclusion, and climate change, Albright stated. Meanwhile, “to my knowledge, IMLS has not begun reviewing any grant terminations, although I understand requests for review have been pouring in,” the staffer wrote. They added that, because the person who handled Freedom of Information Act requests was placed on leave, “to my knowledge, nobody is monitoring the FOIA inbox or responding to FOIA requests” to share facts about IMLS with the American public.

It's still early days for the preliminary injunction ordered in Rhode Island v. Trump, and late in the day on Friday, May 16, defendants filed an appeal of judge McConnell's ruling. Compliance in the Rhode Island district court case would go a long way toward remedies in ALA v. Sonderling—and for the scores of public libraries across the country that rely on IMLS funding.