A major legal victory for libraries, museums, and minority-owned businesses unfolded this week as New York Attorney General Letitia James secured a court order blocking the Trump administration from dismantling three federal agencies that provide crucial funding and support services nationwide. The preliminary injunction, issued by the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island, protects these institutions from what many advocates called an existential threat to their operations, according to the New York Attorney General's office.
The agencies at the center of the storm
The legal battle centers on three federal agencies targeted by a March 14 executive order: the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA), and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS). The executive order directed these agencies to be dismantled "to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law," effectively gutting their operations and placing most staff on administrative leave, as reported by NPR.
The IMLS has been the primary federal funding source for America's libraries and museums since its establishment in 1996. With a budget of nearly $295 million in 2024, the agency distributed $266.7 million through grants, research initiatives, and policy development that year alone. New York received over $8 million, which funded literacy programs, staff training, and improved internet access in libraries across the state, according to Attorney General James.
The MBDA, established to promote the growth of minority-owned businesses, has been operating with severely reduced staff—down from 40 to just five employees before the injunction. Meanwhile, the FMCS, which helps resolve labor disputes and avoid costly work stoppages, had its workforce slashed from approximately 200 to fewer than 15 individuals, severely limiting its ability to function.
A judge puts on the brakes
District Court Judge John J. McConnell Jr., who was nominated to the bench by President Obama in 2011, found that the states established "a strong likelihood of success" on their claims that the executive order violates both the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution. In his ruling, McConnell stated the order "disregards the fundamental constitutional role of each of the branches of our federal government," specifically highlighting that "Congress makes the law and appropriates funds, and the Executive implements the law," Publishers Weekly reported.
The timing of the executive order raised eyebrows among legal experts, as it came just one day before President Trump approved the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act on March 15, which mandated funding for these agencies at fiscal year 2024 levels through September 2025. The judge found this sequence particularly troubling, as the agencies had already begun terminating grants and reducing services immediately after the executive order.
Impact on communities nationwide
For communities across America, especially those in rural areas, the stakes couldn't be higher. When IMLS staff were placed on administrative leave following the executive order, many states found themselves in bureaucratic limbo, unable to access already-approved funding. Some states, including California, Washington, and Connecticut, had their grant funding pulled entirely, while others could not even get basic questions answered as there was no one left at the agency to respond to inquiries, NPR reported in an April broadcast.
"Small and rural libraries, which make up about 77% of our public libraries, disproportionately utilize these resources and funding, and in many cases, it is a genuine lifeline," Kate Laughlin, executive director of the National Association for Rural & Small Libraries, told NPR. These impacts extend beyond just libraries – museums, cultural institutions, and specialized programs like the Autistic Voices Oral History Project found themselves suddenly without funding or support.
Political divide on federal funding
The battle over these agencies highlights a stark political divide on the role of federal funding for cultural and educational institutions. Left-leaning news sources have framed the executive order as an "assault on libraries" and a threat to democratic values. American Libraries Magazine called it a "five-alarm fire," noting that "underneath the Trump administration's bureaucratic language is the clear intent to take away states' funding to support their libraries."
Progressive organizations have mobilized significant opposition, with the American Library Association reporting that more than 55,000 messages were sent to Congress members through their action center in just the first days after the executive order was announced. The ALA and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees have filed their own separate lawsuit against the administration.
Conservative coverage has been notably more limited, with many right-leaning outlets giving less attention to the issue. Some conservative voices have supported the cuts, arguing they target DEI initiatives within these agencies. During his first term, President Trump proposed eliminating the IMLS in all four of his annual budget proposals, but Congress maintained its funding each time, according to American Libraries Magazine.
The Trump administration defended its actions by arguing that limited pauses in federal funding were standard protocol to ensure funds were "distributed appropriately," as administration attorneys stated in court filings. However, Judge McConnell rejected this reasoning, writing that "the broad categorical and sweeping freeze of federal funds is, as the Court found, likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country."
A coalition of states fights back
The lawsuit was led by Attorney General James alongside Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha and Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez. In total, 20 other attorneys general joined the effort, representing Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.
"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," said Attorney General James. "The administration's attack on these agencies is illegal, and today we put a stop to it," she added in a statement.
The preliminary injunction requires the administration to reverse course and restore operations at the three agencies, including bringing back employees who were placed on leave or terminated, and resuming "the processing, disbursement, and payment of already-awarded funding." The defendants now have seven days to file a status report confirming full compliance with the order.
Legal implications
The court's decision sets an important precedent regarding the limits of executive power in relation to congressionally-established agencies and appropriated funds. In his 49-page decision, Judge McConnell found that the executive order effectively attempted to claw from Congress its constitutional power both to establish federal agencies and to set their funding levels.
"By issuing the Reduction EO—which effectively directs withholding the funds that Congress recently statutorily appropriated to IMLS, MBDA and FMCS, resulting in the cessation of several of their programs—the executive is usurping Congress' power of the purse," wrote McConnell, as reported by Government Executive.
Legal experts suggest this ruling could have broader implications for other agencies targeted by similar executive orders, including the Smithsonian's Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, and the U.S. Agency for Global Media.
It's worth noting that a separate lawsuit against the Trump administration to stop the dismantling of IMLS, brought by the American Library Association and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, is also proceeding through the courts. A temporary restraining order was issued in that case on May 1.
What happens next?
While the preliminary injunction provides immediate relief for the affected agencies and their beneficiaries, the legal battle is far from over. The Trump administration is expected to appeal the decision, potentially taking the fight to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
Meanwhile, advocates for libraries, museums, and minority-owned businesses are urging Congress to take more permanent action to protect these agencies. The American Library Association continues to promote its #FundLibraries campaign, encouraging citizens to contact their representatives in support of IMLS funding.
For now, libraries across the country can breathe a sigh of relief as grant funding is restored and agency operations resume. But the broader question of federal support for these institutions remains a contentious political issue likely to continue throughout the budget process and beyond.
New York State Librarian Lauren Moore underscored the stakes, stating, "This institute provides $8 million in federal support, sustaining 55 state library staff members – two-thirds of our state library workforce – and essential programs that directly serve local library communities and residents across the state," according to Hoodline.
As the legal process unfolds, the fate of these agencies and the communities they serve remains uncertain, balanced precariously between judicial rulings, executive actions, and congressional appropriations.
