Agency Overhaul Sparks Immediate Controversy (Image Credits: Flickr)
The Institute of Museum and Library Services recently introduced guidelines for its 2026 funding cycle that emphasize projects fostering civic pride and alignment with President Trump’s policy priorities.[1]
Agency Overhaul Sparks Immediate Controversy
President Trump moved aggressively against the IMLS last March when he issued an executive order to eliminate the agency, fired its director Cyndee Landrum, and installed Keith E. Sonderling as acting head.[1]
Sonderling, a former deputy secretary of labor without prior experience in museums or libraries, placed nearly all 75 employees on administrative leave and rescinded some grants just days into his tenure.[1]
Lawsuits from 21 state attorneys general and the American Library Association halted the dismantling efforts, leading to court-ordered reinstatement of the grants by December.[1]
Now, with a reduced budget of $112 million and plans for only 13 full-time staff, the agency announced 13 grant programs totaling over $78 million.[1]
Guidelines Reference Trump’s Executive Directives
The new cover letters for applications explicitly welcome initiatives that advance “uplifting and positive narratives” about the nation, tying them to several Trump executive orders.[1]
These include critiques of the Smithsonian Institution for promoting “divisive, race-centered ideology,” efforts to end the “anti-Christian weaponization of government,” and a push for “Making Federal Architecture Beautiful Again.”[1]
Such language marks a departure from past practices, where guidelines focused on merit, community access, and preservation without political mandates.[1]
- Promotion of American exceptionalism and love of country.
- Restoration of patriotism in cultural programming.
- Encouragement for non-traditional applicants to align with national pride themes.
- Peer review promised, but with emphasis on executive order compatibility.
Former Leaders Sound the Alarm
Giovanna Urist, a former IMLS senior program officer, described the changes as “chilling,” warning they signal government efforts to control institutional voices.[1]
“I think that we just need to look at what’s happening with the Smithsonian to know that the administration has a very specific goal in mind,” she stated.[1]
Crosby Kemper III, who led the agency under both Trump and Biden, criticized the approach as an extension of political animus, potentially leading to a “whitewashed story” of history.[1]
Leaders from the American Historical Association and American Alliance of Museums expressed worries about applicant uncertainty and risks of grant revocation.[1]
Susan Hildreth, a past IMLS head, noted a lack of transparency in the updated process documentation.[1]
Broader Risks to Cultural Independence
Critics fear the guidelines could coerce institutions into self-censorship, mirroring Smithsonian audits on historical framing and university probes into diversity practices.[1]
Libraries and museums, trusted anchors in communities across political lines, now face questions about federal influence on narratives.[1]
DePaul law professor Patty Gerstenblith highlighted First Amendment issues, arguing the funding serves as leverage for altered historical presentations.[1]
Key Takeaways
- New criteria prioritize “uplifting” stories aligned with Trump policies, raising politicization fears.
- Agency turmoil included mass firings and grant rescissions, now reversed by courts.
- Experts warn of eroded trust and coerced narratives in publicly funded culture.
Libraries and museums stand at a crossroads where federal dollars could reshape public understanding of the nation’s past. As nearly 600 grants await award, institutions must weigh funding against autonomy.[1]
What implications do these changes hold for cultural preservation? Share your thoughts in the comments. For more details, see the original reporting by ProPublica.[1]
