The American Library Association and American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) on Thursday were granted a “narrow” temporary restraining order (TRO) against further action by Institute of Museum and Library Services acting director Keith Sonderling and agency defendants to dismantle the Institute for Museum and Library Services. In his May 1 memorandum, judge Richard J. Leon of the district court of the District of Columbia agreed to “grant in part” the TRO to “prevent additional harm” to IMLS, its employees, and grantees. The judge stopped short of providing all relief sought by the plaintiffs in ALA v. Sonderling, and he ordered the plaintiffs and defendants to submit a joint status report by May 6 so that the case might proceed.

“The immediate halt to the gutting of IMLS is a win for America's libraries and the millions of Americans who rely on them,” said ALA president Cindy Hohl, in a statement. “ALA is encouraged that the court recognizes the immediacy of the need for IMLS and library services at risk. The temporary restraining order will stop the dismantling of IMLS while the court considers the merits in this case." Still, she added, “even with a temporary restraining order in place, Congress also must act to ensure our nation's libraries can continue to serve their communities, including by funding IMLS for next year.”

AFSCME president Lee Saunders echoed Hohl’s sentiments. “We celebrate today's decision as a victory for library and museum workers and the communities who depend on them,” Saunders said in a statement. “They do everything from helping workers connect to job opportunities to instilling a love of learning and inspiring creativity in others. This ruling will halt the layoffs of the critical workers who support them. We look forward to moving our case forward and reversing this unlawful shut down.”

The request for a TRO was a last-minute effort to forestall a May 4 reduction in force at IMLS. The agency is severely curtailed, with only 12 of approximately 75 employees remaining in the office and the rest on administrative leave since April 4. According to a furloughed IMLS staffer, who spoke with PW on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution, around three IMLS employees on administratively determined (AD) status, including at least one union worker, are known to have been fired altogether on April 18; AD employees are employed at will, and have less stability than typical federal employees. Though regular IMLS employees were given 30 days of paid leave ahead of the RIF, the AD employees received two weeks’ notice and then were let go.

In their lawsuit, the ALA and AFSCME have been seeking a preliminary injunction (PI) against the further demolition of IMLS. During oral argument in an April 30 motion hearing, “given the imminent firings, plaintiffs moved to convert the PI motion” into a TRO, and the court agreed. Judge Leon saw fit to add, in a footnote, that “The Court did so over defense counsel’s objection that had no apparent legal basis to support it!”

In his memo, the judge explained how IMLS ordinarily should operate according to the 1996 Museum and Library Services Act (MLSA), which “sets out multiple requirements for IMLS, including certain grants that must be issued and certain qualifications which the Director must possess.” He traced how Sonderling and the defendants have been “shutting down the agency” in response to a March 14 executive order.

Judge Leon sounded sympathetic to the argument that “the wholesale terminations of grants and services and the mass layoffs appear to violate the clear statutory mandates outlined in the MLSA.” He expressed concern that “defendants’ conduct contravenes Congress’s appropriation of almost $300 million to IMLS,” and said plaintiffs were “likely to succeed” in arguing that defendants are violating the Administrative Procedure Act.

Preserving the status quo

For now, the damaged agency is far from being restored: the narrow TRO serves only “to preserve the status quo as of the date of this Order,” the judge wrote. Yet the court memorandum, coming three days ahead of the planned reduction in force, is of vital importance to IMLS and those who benefit from its programs.

In his memorandum, Leon ordered that the agency defendants “shall not take any further actions to dissolve IMLS or its operations,” cannot fire any more staffers or put them on leave, and “shall not further pause, cancel, or otherwise terminate IMLS grants or contracts or fail to fund” them. In his listing of “agency defendants,” judge Leon named Sonderling, IMLS, Amy Gleason, U.S. DOGE Service, U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization, Russell Vought, and the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, but for unknown reasons omitted the name of codefendant Donald Trump.

The judge also shared his reasoning on why the plaintiffs “met their burden to obtain a TRO.” To qualify for a temporary restraining order, Judge Leon wrote, the party making the motion must have “a substantial likelihood of success on the merits,” evidence that irreparable harm will take place without the order and that the order “would not substantially injure” anyone else, and a result that “furthers the public interest.” He found reason in all these points, noting that the harm being done is “not merely economic” and that “preserving crucial access to library services outweighs defendants’ claimed interest.”

This article has been updated with further information.