Adam Webb, who has dedicated 18 years to public libraries, is currently the executive director of the Garland County Library. He emphasizes the crucial role funding from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) plays in bolstering library systems. With an IMLS grant, the library successfully launched its “bookmobile,” which extends book lending and various services to rural communities in Arkansas and to individuals who cannot make it to the main branch.
The “bookmobile” also offers free Wi-Fi, a service Webb deems essential for community members who depend on libraries for information access.
Nevertheless, Webb and his colleagues express worries that such services are at risk due to recent directives from President Donald Trump aimed at slashing IMLS funding through an Executive Order issued on March 14, titled “Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy.”
“In a state like Arkansas, which is primarily rural and economically challenged, we rely heavily on federal funding. If that support diminishes, vital services will disappear, as many individuals simply can’t afford to bear those costs themselves,” Webb explains.
Trump’s Executive Order not only affects the IMLS but also mirrors a broader agenda for his second term, focused on eliminating what he perceives as federal waste.
Webb stresses that the alterations at the IMLS are merely one facet of the challenges libraries face under Trump’s administration, with rising concerns about book censorship also coming to the forefront.
Read More: What’s At Stake With The Supreme Court’s LGBTQ+ Schoolbooks Case
Investigating the Impact of IMLS Funding Cuts
The Executive Order has led to significant downsizing across seven federal agencies, including the IMLS. Reports from the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) Local 3403 indicate that many IMLS staff members have been placed on administrative leave since then.
“Today, the Institute of Museum and Library Services communicated to its entire staff that they are being placed on immediate administrative leave,” announced AFGE 3403 on March 31, following a swift meeting between department personnel and IMLS leadership.
In early April, the American Library Association (ALA), in conjunction with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), initiated legal proceedings against the Trump Administration, underscoring the critical role local libraries play as trusted public institutions. They contend that the shutdown of the IMLS has already begun to create a damaging ripple effect on libraries across the nation.
Cindy Hohl, president of the ALA, points out that many of the 125,000 libraries nationwide depend on IMLS funding for essential programs, including summer reading initiatives and translation services. Without the backing of IMLS, libraries are facing “significant challenges,” leading some librarians to make tough decisions in response to immediate funding issues.
“Rural and small communities will bear the heaviest burden from cuts to funding and services,” Hohl asserts. “How can lawmakers claim that these communities do not need access to the internet, public computers, and vital reading materials?”
Established by Congress in 1996, the IMLS was designed to support libraries and museums across the country. Last year alone, it granted $266 million in funding and research support to cultural institutions. Hohl expresses concern that shifting funding responsibilities from the IMLS to state and local governments will not create equivalent models of free services currently provided by libraries.
She also highlights the high favorability ratings for libraries, noting that 92% of parents and 90% of voters view libraries positively. More than half of voters consider public libraries essential community institutions. During the COVID-19 pandemic, libraries became crucial points for material pick-up and food distribution, as well as spaces where individuals could apply for jobs and benefits, helping community members engage with their surroundings.
“This is why the American Library Association felt compelled to join the lawsuit against this Executive Order. We believe it’s critical for the public to grasp the unfolding circumstances,” Hohl emphasizes. “The closure of libraries in this nation would signify the end of democracy.”
The resistance against the Trump Administration’s funding cuts goes beyond the ALA and specific library advocacy groups. On April 3, major publishing houses including Penguin Random House, Hachette Book Group, Macmillan Publishers, Simon & Schuster, and Sourcebooks sent a letter to Congress in support of libraries, warning that dismantling the IMLS “would leave millions of Americans without access to the books, tools, and other resources essential for participation in today’s world.”
In Arkansas, Webb underscores the vital role of the IMLS in funding a statewide resource-sharing initiative known as Traveler. The financial support from IMLS allowed the State Library to acquire an extensive database package, which Webb notes would have cost around $50 million if libraries had to purchase it independently.
“This isn’t just about saving taxpayer dollars; it’s about cutting costs for the federal government while shifting the financial burden onto state and local entities,” Webb explains. “This approach raises serious concerns that transcend party lines.”
Africa Hands, an assistant professor in the information science department at the University at Buffalo, has had her IMLS grant terminated, which funded her research on how public libraries serve as information resources for college-bound students. Now, she is uncertain about how her findings will reach the libraries that could benefit from understanding their impact on high school and returning college students.
Moreover, Hands points out that IMLS funding cuts will adversely affect not only library users but also library professionals, as layoffs are expected at local levels. Additionally, those studying to become librarians are witnessing unsettling developments at the federal level.
“Consider the message this sends to future librarians, the students I teach, as they observe what’s unfolding in their communities,” Hands reflects. “It can be disheartening for both faculty and students to realize that their profession is being systematically dismantled, which takes a personal, emotional, and mental toll.”
Book Removals in Military Libraries and Wider Censorship Concerns
Beyond funding reductions, librarians are increasingly concerned about the removal of books from military libraries.
In a January Executive Order dubbed “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling,” Trump banned DEI materials from K-12 education. Several military academies, including West Point and the Naval Academy, have since adopted these directives. Earlier this year, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a memo requesting a review of library books in educational settings for military children and DOD civilian employees, as reported by the Guardian.
Following this, the U.S. Naval Academy published a list of books that were removed to comply with Trump’s measures against DEI. Among the titles eliminated were Janet Jacobs’s Memorializing the Holocaust, Ibram X. Kendi’s How to Be Anti-Racist, and Maya Angelou’s acclaimed autobiography, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. Numerous titles addressing gender and sexuality were also excluded.
These actions have sparked backlash from advocates and lawmakers, with several Democratic representatives sending a letter to the Army, Navy, and Air Force on April 7, condemning the book removals as a “blatant attack on the First Amendment,” likening it to a troubling return to McCarthy-era censorship.
On April 15, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) expressed its support for a lawsuit initiated by students in Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) schools on military bases against the Trump Administration.
“The implementation of these Executive Orders, without any due process or input from parents or professionals, infringes on our children’s right to access information crucial to understanding their histories, bodies, and identities,” stated Natalie Tolley, a plaintiff representing her three children in DoDEA schools, in an ACLU announcement. “My daughters, like all children, deserve access to books that reflect their life experiences and broaden their exposure to diversity.”
In addition to censorship in DOD schools, librarians are also apprehensive about how the new Administration is addressing censorship matters on local levels. The Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights recently released a statement titled “U.S. Department of Education Ends Biden’s Book Ban Hoax,” dismissing complaints regarding book bans. This follows a report from PEN America in November 2024, indicating a nearly 200% rise in school book bans during the 2023-2024 academic year.
John Chrastka, executive director of EveryLibrary, a national political action committee that advocates for libraries, notes that they have been actively working against censorship laws and book bans at the state level. He describes states as “the testing ground for censorship and discrimination in public and school libraries.”
Webb is a plaintiff in a censorship lawsuit against the state of Arkansas, emphasizing that the ramifications of federal-level censorship reach far beyond the students affected; they send a broader message.
“The messaging from the federal government is likely to embolden individuals to think, ‘We were right all along,’” he comments. “It reinforces the notion that what was available on library shelves was inappropriate, as shown by the removal of these materials from service academies and military libraries.”
