When President Trump recently proposed eliminating the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), librarians and educators voiced outrage, confusion and fear. Soon afterward, the appointment of Keith E Sonderling as acting director of IMLS highlighted the administration’s intention to reshape the agency’s priorities toward “promoting American exceptionalism” and cultivating “patriotism”.

As someone deeply involved in the library world, I wasn’t surprised by Trump’s move.

Given escalating book bans, rising censorship and growing hostility toward educational and cultural institutions, this crisis has been building for years. Yet the predictability doesn’t make it less troubling; it signals clearly that the stakes are higher than ever.

To understand why this matters so deeply, it’s crucial to recognize what IMLS actually does. Established in 1996, it is the primary federal agency providing crucial financial support to libraries and museums nationwide. It invests hundreds of millions of dollars annually to help institutions develop literacy programs, workforce training, digital resources, cultural preservation and civic engagement initiatives. Cutting this funding is more than just budget trimming. It means dismantling essential community infrastructure.

Many argue that libraries have become obsolete relics in the age of Google and smartphones, but reality says otherwise. About 77 million Americans depend annually on public libraries for reliable internet access, according to Pew Research. In Dallas, Texas, for instance, nearly 3.9m digital resources were checked out from the public library last year alone, proving these institutions remain essential gateways to digital opportunity – especially for economically disadvantaged families.

Far from being fiscal drains, libraries drive economic growth. Programs like South Bend, Indiana’s “Bendable” initiative, a partnership with the Drucker Institute, deliver precise workforce training that directly meets local business needs. According to the Ohio Library Council, initiatives like these yield nearly $4 in economic return for every taxpayer dollar spent. Defunding libraries doesn’t eliminate these economic needs; it simply shifts costs elsewhere, ultimately burdening communities and taxpayers even more.

The consequences are especially severe in Indigenous communities. Take the Nisqually Tribal Library in Olympia, Washington, where IMLS grants supported a StoryCorps recording studio that helps preserve Indigenous languages, histories and cultural identities. Without continued support, nearly 200 tribal libraries nationwide risk closing their doors, depriving communities of irreplaceable resources for preserving their heritage and deepening educational inequities.

The consequences of losing federal support would also profoundly harm academia, weakening America’s ability to innovate and remain globally competitive. Federal investment enabled the Association of College & Research Libraries to launch “Assessment in Action,” helping over 200 academic libraries nationwide to clearly measure their contributions to student success and career readiness. At the University of Washington’s Information School, recent grants supported projects combating misinformation. Similarly, the University of Virginia Library recently received IMLS funding to develop a community-driven AI platform to expand open educational resources, directly benefiting educators, students and the public by making educational content widely accessible and adaptable. At the University of South Florida, an IMLS grant supports the Autism Informed School Library Educators (AISLE) Project, helping librarians nationwide provide inclusive, accessible services for autistic students. Losing these initiatives would severely limit the kind of research, education and innovation that strengthens society as a whole.

How did we arrive at this moment? The targeting of library funding appears to be financial, but it’s deeply political. Last year alone, the American Library Association reported 1,247 attempts to ban library books nationwide, largely targeting works related to race, gender identity, and LGBTQ+ experiences. Librarians increasingly face intimidation simply for defending intellectual freedom, the very principle libraries have always championed.

Yet libraries remain nonpartisan, practical institutions focused on ensuring equitable access to information, learning and civic participation. From Boston’s Edward M Kennedy Institute, which offers IMLS supported immersive Senate debate simulations, to voter registration drives and disability-inclusive voting programs in Illinois and Alaska, libraries sustain democracy itself.

The challenges libraries face today are indeed worse than expected. They reflect a troubling political shift and they threaten to undermine America’s economic strength, educational equality and democratic foundations in ways we cannot afford.

But there is still time to act. If you value libraries, education and equitable access to information, I encourage you to take clear, concrete steps:

• Contact your legislators directly: Visit ala.org/advocacy to voice your opposition to these cuts.

• Show up locally: Attend community meetings and school board sessions to advocate for continued funding and speak openly about why libraries matter.

• Speak out publicly: Share your support online, tell your own library stories and encourage others to act using hashtags like #FundLibraries or #ShowUpForLibraries.

We saw this crisis coming, but our response can still make a difference. Let’s ensure that this predictable attack doesn’t quietly become a permanent loss.