On May 8th the Trump administration fired Dr. Carla Hayden, the Librarian of Congress, with a terse two line email. It first appeared that this action was just one of a barrage of attacks aimed at replacing highly qualified public servants with Trump loyalists, but some larger consequences soon became apparent. The dismissal was widely reported as an attempt to enforce administration restrictions on DEI and free speech issues and an escalation of the culture war that continues to surround books, libraries, museums and other institutions.
Who is Carla Hayden?
Dr. Carla Hayden, for those who are not familiar with her resume, is the 14th Librarian of Congress and the first African-American woman to serve in that post. She holds a Ph.D in Library Science, is a past president of the American Library Association (ALA) and formerly headed the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore. In 2016 she was appointed to the post by President Obama and subsequently confirmed. When she was abruptly terminated she had one year left in a ten year term. In recent published comments she noted that she has focused on efforts to digitize the LOC’s immense collection.
And what is the Library of Congress?
Founded in 1800, the Library of Congress is the world’s largest library, with over 178 million items in its collection. Every day the Library receives some 15,000 items and adds more than 10,000 items to its collections, according to its website.
The library is also a repository for two copies of every copyrightable book published in the US as well as a non-circulating research institution where patrons must be at least 16 years old to use the facilities. So concerns that the library’s action would be harmful to children appear to be misplaced.
The LOC also hosts multiple real and virtual events. One of the best known is its annual National Book Festival, a free event celebrating books, authors, and literacy. At this time the status of the next National Book Festival, currently scheduled for Sat., Sept. 6, 2025, is uncertain.
There’s more to it than that: Turf War and Copyright Office has AI Concerns
But as the month of May moved on, national news coverage made it clear that there was more to this move than a heavy-handed attempt at enforcing the new anti-DEI line.
Long stories in the national media made it clear that this incident could well turn into a bi-partisan turf war between the President (Executive branch) and the members of Congress (Legislative branch). Or, as the AP put it in a May 18th story, “President Donald Trump’s abrupt firing of top officials at the Library of Congress and equally sudden attempt to appoint a slate of loyalists as replacements has instead morphed into an enormous fight over the separation of powers, as the White House tries to wrest control of what has for centuries been a legislative institution.”
According to the AP, “It’s a power struggle with potentially vast consequences. The Library of Congress not only stores the world's largest collection of books but also an office overseeing reams of copyrighted material of untold value.
“There is a research institute that has long been protected from outside influence. Its servers house extremely sensitive information regarding claims of workplace violations on Capitol Hill, as well as payments and other financial data for the legislative branch’s more than 30,000 employees. There’s even speculation that the whole affair is tied to an ongoing debate over whether big tech companies can use copyrighted material for artificial intelligence systems.
“Because of this, the battle over control of the Library of Congress has prompted Republican leaders on Capitol Hill to deliver rare pushback against a president who has pressed to expand the boundaries of his own power to enact his priorities.
“Senate Majority Leader John Thune and other Republicans have been talking with the White House about a potential path to détente.”
This concern was reiterated in a NY Times story on May 15 quoting Thune, “We’ve made it clear that there needs to be a consultation around this.” He suggested that the White House had overstepped its authority and that “both Congress and the president play roles in deciding who leads the library.”
Also quoted in a NYTimes story was Sen Mike Rounds, Republican from South Dakota, who said, “I don’t think they have the ability to make that decision in the executive branch…My understanding is these are congressional employees, and because of that, I think it’s up to Congress to make that decision, and not the White House. But we’re going to check.”
Strong reaction also came from the Democratic side of the aisle. Among those who objected was U.S. Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts who called the action “part of Trump and Republicans’ coordinated, anti-Black assault on truth, education, and the American story itself ... .Trump wants a citizenry that is ignorant, uninformed, and uneducated about America’s past.”
Most of the national media stories agreed with the AP that “potential meddling” with the Congressional Research Service (CRS), known as the nonpartisan think tank of Capitol Hill, was a major component in the ongoing concern. The CRS fields roughly 75,000 requests from members of Congress every year for research, legal expertise and other information critical for policy making. Much of this information is considered confidential and proprietary to the Congress.
Next came the Copyright Office:
Almost immediately after the termination of Dr. Hayden, the ax fell on Shira Perlmutter, (an LOC official appointed by Hayden in 2020). Perlmutter headed the US Copyright office housed within the LOC.
The AP said, “Shortly before Perlmutter (was fired), her office released a report that questioned whether it was legal for the tech industry to use copyrighted material to ‘train’ their artificial intelligence systems. Tech companies contend that doing so is legal when used for educational or research purposes or creating something new. Perlmutter’s report said doing so, in some circumstances, would go beyond established boundaries of fair use when the AI-generated content is competing with creative works made by people.”
The AP story noted “The material there is extremely valuable. For instance, copyright violation damages for the office's existing collection — if, for instance, tech companies scraped the material for AI purposes and then later were found liable for copyright infringement — would likely exceed $1.5 trillion, according to a person familiar with the calculations.”
So who is in charge?
While Trump has named Todd Blanche, a deputy attorney general who had represented the president in his criminal proceedings — he and his associates have not appeared to challenge the assertion by the library that one of its veteran officials would be the acting head. It would be unheard of for an executive branch official such as Blanche to simultaneously serve in the legislative branch, according to experts.
Paul Perkins, associate deputy attorney general, has been named as Perlmutter’s replacement at the Copyright Office on an acting basis.
In the meantime, while the warring factions and their various advocates attempt to sort out the chain of command, the person who appears to be in charge of the LOC on a day to day basis is Robert Randolph Newlen. He had been principal deputy librarian, and according to library regulations, was in line to succeed the librarian of Congress in case of absence or temporary unavailability.
In response to the dismissal of Dr. Hayden the ALA and other library organizations have issued critical statements and called for her reinstatement. An organization called Take Action for Libraries has also mounted a petition and letter writing campaign to reverse the decision.
—---------------------
UPDATE: In other related news RBH Monthly covered the administration’s executive order terminating the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) and its employees in our April issue .The IMLS is a federal agency that coordinates and assists with federal grants and funding for libraries and museums.
In more recent developments an injunction from a federal judge is working to restore IMLS.
“According to the court documents, the injunction calls for the Trump administration to begin bringing back the IMLS in full, as well as its employees.
“In April 21 states filed a lawsuit against President Trump for his dismantling of several federal agencies, including the IMLS. Those suing were Rhode Island, Arizona, Colorado, Minnesota, Maryland, Connecticut, New York, Hawaii, California, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oregon, Nevada, Vermont, New Mexico, Wisconsin and Washington.
“The lawsuit said, in part, that “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, and undermine library programs, economic opportunity, and the free flow of commerce throughout the country.”
Judge John J. McConnell Jr., Chief Judge of the District of Rhode Island, issued a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration on May 13.”
Court documents show that Judge McConnell granted the full restoration of three agencies: the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) and the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA).
The injunction said that the Trump administration must take all necessary steps to restore the IMLS, as well as the employees who were placed on leave or terminated as a result of the Executive Order.
Additionally, the Trump administration is not allowed to take any more actions in reducing the agency, unless there is a reasonable explanation for the action that does not prevent the department from fulfilling its requirements. The injunction said these actions needed to be carried out by the Trump administration within seven days of the order or give an explanation why full compliance has not been practiced.
