Photo credit: www.publishersweekly.com

State Attorneys General Challenge Trump Administration’s Move to Dismantle Federal Agencies

A coalition of attorneys general from 21 states has initiated legal action against the Trump administration in an effort to halt plans that would dismantle the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) along with six other federal entities. This suit was formally filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island on April 4, targeting a March 14 executive order issued by President Donald Trump. The executive order instructs the reduction of the IMLS and calls for the restoration of its full functions.

The plaintiffs include attorneys general from four states that Trump secured in the 2024 election: Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin. The legal filing seeks an emergency temporary restraining order to nullify the executive order, arguing that the President lacks the authority to override laws established by Congress. The attorneys general contend that the administration’s approach contravenes the Administrative Procedure Act, stating, “If permitted to stand, the shredding of these statutorily mandated agencies will inflict immediate and irreparable harms on the Plaintiff States, their residents, and the public at large.”

Further elaborating on their position, the complaint highlights the potential risks associated with dismantling established agencies ahead of significant funding deadlines. “The sudden halting of the agencies’ work after decades of close cooperation will immediately put at risk hundreds of millions of dollars in grant funding on which the States depend,” they argue. The filing deems the Closure Order and subsequent actions by the administration as illegal and unconstitutional.

In the wake of the March 14 executive order, the IMLS has experienced considerable upheaval. The recent changes have seen the Trump administration appoint a new acting director, who has collaborated with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to place a significant majority of IMLS staff on administrative leave, a move that has taken place without the consent of the advisory board tasked with supporting the agency. Reports indicate that approximately 85% of the IMLS’s workforce is currently on leave, although this figure differs from earlier unverified claims.

In correspondence sent to the acting director, Keith Sonderling, the National Museum and Library Services Board expressed concern over the handling of staff during this period of transition, alluding to suggestions that “a small number of staff” may have been reinstated since the administrative leave was enforced.

The lawsuit does not merely challenge the legality of the administration’s orders; it asserts a constitutional argument as well. “If the President disagrees with Congress’s decision to support the Nation’s libraries and museums… he is free to seek legislation abolishing the agencies that perform these—and many other—vital functions,” noted the plaintiffs. They emphasized that the president is not empowered to unilaterally dissolve federal agencies, which undermines the separation of powers integral to government operations.

Source
www.publishersweekly.com