Update: Early Wednesday afternoon, the White House rescinded its order to freeze trillions of dollars in federal grants and loans. Opponents of the freeze credited the outcry from the American people with forcing the reversal.
While President Donald J. Trump's order to freeze all federal loans, grants, and other financial assistance has been rescinded after being temporarily blocked by a federal judge, libraries, arts agencies, and others are shaken by the threat of devastating cuts.
Per a memo from the White House budget office (OMB), the freeze would require all federal agencies to pause the disbursement of funds to programs "including, but not limited to, financial assistance for foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal." The memo also calls for agencies to perform a "comprehensive analysis" to ensure its grant and loan programs comply with the order.
The OMB has since sent a document to federal agencies—including the Library of Congress, the Institute of Museum and Library Services, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the National Endowment for the Humanities—requesting information about more than 2,600 programs.
In a press briefing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt clarified that the move was "not a blanket pause on federal assistance and grant programs from the Trump administration." She noted that affected agencies could make the case to the White House to keep their funding: “If they feel that programs are necessary and in line with the president’s agenda, then the Office of Management and Budget will review those policies."
In a statement, the EveryLibrary Institute decried the order, which the pro-library PAC said would "considerably impact libraries." EveryLibrary particularly criticized the implication of ideologically-based funding. "The administration says it will conduct a comprehensive review of grant recipients' political and social ideology before resuming any funding," the statement reads. "Essentially, Trump requires a loyalty test from government agencies before he allows them to resume their work. This is undoubtedly un-American. This action to withhold funds to grant recipients authorized by Congress is also likely illegal."
Indeed, accusations of propagating "gender ideology" and other "woke" ideas are now frequently levied against libraries and librarians as they contend with a swell of book banning attempts by conservatives and on-the-job harassment from patrons. However, the extent of the potential impact on libraries remains unclear. In an interview with PW, economist Ben Kaplan noted that "federal grants for local institutions like libraries often cover things like renovations and one-time improvements rather than operating costs. So we might see those kind of upgrade project pause or stop."
As for arts agencies, the order could create a similar impetus to restrict funding for artists and projects to ones that are "in line with the president's agenda." Since its founding in 1965, the NEA has awarded more than $125 million in direct grants to literary arts nonprofit organizations and more than $57 million to individual writers, and more than 100 books were published with support from the NEH in 2024 alone.
Earlier this month, the two agencies announced their latest cycle of grants for publishers, literary organizations, book projects and more. The budget for fiscal year 2025 allots $210.1 million and $200.1 million for the NEA and NEH, respectively. NEA chair Maria Rosario Jackson, who was appointed by President Biden in 2021, resigned on January 20, the day of Trump's inauguration. A spokesperson for the NEA told PW that the agency was "currently reviewing the recent executive orders and accompanying guidance from the White House Office of Management and Budget to ensure compliance and provide the required reporting."
Kaplan, the author of the book Scholars & Dollars, predicted that for agencies such as the NEA, "many grant programs may be in a wait-and-see mode. The ones that have the most development private donor networks and access to state funds may be able to make up the difference elsewhere but others more dependent on federal grants may need to pause or scale back programs."
In a statement, the Authors Guild wrote that “individual writers and literary organization that have planned programs according to funds awarded but not yet distributed by the NEA and NEH will be thrown into turmoil” should the order ultimately stand. That said, it added, “The legality of clawing back promised funds on which there is clear reliance is highly questionable.”
The AG added that “Trump’s executive order also ignores the fact that the NEA and the NEH are vital economic engines. The arts and culture sector contributes over $800 billion annually to the U.S. economy, and NEA seed funding helps generate significant private investment, with each federal dollar typically leveraging up to $9 in private and other public funds. The funding, which represents less than 0.004% of the total U.S. federal budget, is critical to a vibrant and diverse culture.”
This is not the first time Trump has attempted to end federal arts funding. During his first term, Trump repeatedly proposed eliminating the NEA and the NEH, but both agencies survived—and saw their budgets grow—thanks to bipartisan support in Congress. Currently, Republicans retain control of Congress.