Trump Administration's "Chilling" Political Shift in Library and Museum Grant Guidelines

United States - Ekhbary News Agency

Trump Administration's "Chilling" Political Shift in Library and Museum Grant Guidelines Sparks Widespread Concern

The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), a vital federal agency that provides critical funding to cultural institutions across the United States, is undergoing a significant and controversial transformation under the influence of the Trump administration. New grant guidelines, which overtly solicit projects aligning with former President Donald Trump's vision for America, have ignited widespread alarm among cultural leaders, historians, and former agency officials. Critics contend that this ideological shift jeopardizes the long-standing non-partisan nature of federal support for libraries and museums, potentially leading to a constrained or distorted view of American history and culture.

Established in 1996, IMLS has historically served as the sole dedicated source of federal support for libraries and a primary federal funder for museums and archives. Its enduring grant programs have focused on fostering community engagement, ensuring public access to information, and bolstering institutions' capacity to preserve collections and prepare for unforeseen challenges. Past guidelines were characterized by their apolitical stance, prioritizing merit, programmatic excellence, and alignment with the professional standards of the cultural sector.

However, the application cycle for 2026 marks a stark departure. Cover letters accompanying grant applications now explicitly state that the institute "particularly welcomes" projects that resonate with Trump's vision. These include initiatives designed to cultivate an appreciation for the country "through uplifting and positive narratives." The agency cites several executive orders, notably one that criticized the Smithsonian Institution for its "divisive, race-centered ideology" – a reference to Trump's past remarks about the museum focusing "too much on how bad slavery was." Further, the guidelines reference an executive order calling for an end to "the anti-Christian weaponization of government" and another titled "Making Federal Architecture Beautiful Again."

This unprecedented move has provoked strong reactions. Former IMLS leaders from both Republican and Democratic administrations, alongside representatives from prominent library, historical, and museum associations, have voiced profound concerns. They fear that such politically charged criteria could compel institutions to present a sanitized, limited, or even distorted version of American history. There's also apprehension that accepting these grants might expose institutions to increased scrutiny and administrative control, echoing the Trump administration's extensive audit of Smithsonian exhibits to "assess tone, historical framing and alignment with American ideals."

Giovanna Urist, who served as a senior program officer at IMLS from 2021 to 2023, described the new guidelines as "chilling." She articulated, "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 when it comes to controlling the voice of organizations and museums across the country."

In response to inquiries from ProPublica, an IMLS spokesperson indicated that it is not unusual for the institute to issue directors’ letters with grant applications, asserting that the current letter merely informs applicants "about this Administration’s thematic emphases in the semi-quincentennial year." The spokesperson, however, declined to address criticisms regarding the insertion of political themes into a historically nonpartisan program. The statement further claimed, "Under President Trump’s leadership, IMLS is working to revitalize our cultural institutions, urging less traditional applicants to consider working with us, and to promote civic pride and a deep sense of belonging among all Americans." They added that all qualifying institutions would receive due consideration and peer review.

The current policy shift follows a turbulent period for IMLS under the Trump administration. Last March, Trump attempted to dismantle the agency via executive order and dismissed its director, Cyndee Landrum, a career library professional. This action prompted a lawsuit from attorneys general across 21 states and the American Library Association, which successfully halted the dissolution efforts in court. Subsequently, the administration appointed Deputy Secretary of Labor Keith E. Sonderling as acting director, despite his apparent lack of prior professional experience in museums or libraries. Sonderling, upon his appointment, vowed to "revitalize IMLS and restore focus on patriotism, ensuring we preserve our country’s core values, promote American exceptionalism and cultivate love of country in future generations." Within ten days, he placed nearly all 75 agency employees on administrative leave, fired the board, and rescinded several previously awarded grants. These grants were later reinstated by court order in December.

The broader implications of these changes are significant. Directors who led IMLS under previous administrations, including Barack Obama's, emphasized that while priorities might shift with new leadership, these changes were always implemented with extensive input from the field, not through directives to align with a president's specific worldview. The new guidelines, therefore, signal a clear administrative preference for particular narratives, potentially compromising the integrity and independence of cultural institutions.

Even Crosby Kemper III, a lifelong conservative Republican appointed by Trump to lead IMLS in 2019, expressed strong disapproval. While acknowledging his own conservative leanings and a belief that the field might need a course correction from what he perceived as a leftward bias, Kemper unequivocally condemned the current administration's approach. He dismissed Trump's executive orders as "nonsense" and the grant guidelines as "horrific," stating, "It’s clear the administration wants a whitewashed story, if you’ll pardon the pun there. And that’s wrong."

Leaders from the American Historical Association, the American Library Association, and the American Alliance of Museums have collectively warned that the altered grant language and recent funding actions have created an atmosphere of profound uncertainty within the cultural sector. Institutions are left questioning whether previously awarded grants could be revoked, as occurred last year, or if accepting new funding might subject them to broader investigations, similar to the scrutiny faced by 52 universities over their DEI practices. The IMLS spokesperson offered no comment on these critical concerns, underscoring the ongoing tension between political agendas and the essential mission of preserving and interpreting culture without bias.

Ekhbary News Agency