Legislation and Policy
To increase ACRL's visibility and influence in the arena of higher education policy development and legislation, the ACRL Government Relations Committee (in consultation with the ACRL Board and staff) takes a direct and active role in formulating the ACRL legislative agenda including objectives for legislative action at the national level on issues which may affect the welfare of academic and research libraries. Find out more below:
ACRL Legislative Agenda 2026-27
ACRL speaks out on higher education policy development, legislation, and best practices.
Build relationships with local community influencers and elected leaders.
Federal resources help you learn more about important issues.
ACRL Legislative Agenda 2026–27
PDF version of 2026-27 Legislative Agenda
Approved by the ACRL Board of Directors in April 2026.
The ACRL Legislative Agenda and the ALA Legislative Agenda list objectives for legislative action at the national level on issues that affect the welfare of libraries. ACRL’s annual Legislative Agenda focuses on issues affecting academic and research libraries that the U.S. Congress has recently acted on, or will act on in the year ahead. ACRL is active in advocating for policy and legislation through the ALA Public Policy and Advocacy Office, as well as through working with coalitions such as the Open Access Working Group. The following action areas are listed in priority order and include issues that will be the focus of ACRL’s advocacy efforts in 2026-27, along with a watchlist of issues of great concern to academic librarians:
1. Impacts to Higher Education
2. Public Access to Reliable Governmental Data
3. Elimination and Reorganization of Federal Agencies & Departments
4. Safety, Security, and Ethical Concerns of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Watchlist:
1. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival (DACA)
3. Affordable College Textbook Act
4. Accessible Instructional Materials
1. Impacts to Higher Education
Direct
Libraries
Background/Current Status
Libraries at higher education institutions are feeling the direct constraints of federal funding either being threatened or eliminated (see below). Due to lack of funding being received to conduct research or support basic student services, university wide budget issues are rising, forcing some institutions to make drastic cuts across campus. Either collections budgets are being impacted or librarians are being let go.
These drastic cuts to collections budgets in particular are forcing libraries to make hard decisions around big subscription deals like Elsevier, Wiley Journals, or Taylor & Francis Journals (to name a few), especially as the cost to maintain these subscriptions has risen significantly faster than library budgets. More large academic libraries are choosing to cut these large publishing packages and rely on services like InterLibrary Loan or Article Galaxy Scholar for access. However, with these large subscriptions being cancelled, this leaves larger questions about the future of the scholarly landscape, publishing, and high ranking research institutions.
An Executive Order, signed by the current administration on March 14, ordered the elimination of several government entities, including the Institute of Museum & Library Services (IMLS). Citing the need to lower government costs, elimination of the IMLS would deprive funding and grants to libraries and museums across the nation. The elimination of IMLS funding would not only harm higher education institutions, but would include cutting resources and services devoted to equal access to information, as well as removing or decreasing monies serving rural communities.
ACRL released a statement soon after, opposing the Order and detailing examples of programs and communities that would be affected by the loss of IMLS funding. ACRL also reaffirmed its position as an advocate for further funding of research and academic librarianship and encouraged all ACRL members to share their dissent against the Order.
The court case, Rhode Island v. Trump, was filed by twenty-one state Attorneys Generals and on November 21, 2025, a judge issued an injunction on the dismantling of IMLS. On December 3, 2025, all grants and funding that were terminated by the earlier executive order were reinstated. The current administration dropped its appeal and reached an agreement with ALA and AFSCME to permanently restore funding and to protect against future attacks.
Links to More Information
What Trump’s Proposed Budget Cuts From Higher Education And Research
Unkept Promises: State Cuts to Higher Education Threaten Access and Equity
ACRL Opposes Elimination of IMLS
Research & Development Centers
Federal Funding for Higher Education
Background/Current Status
In March 2025, President Trump signed an executive order initiating the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education. This action aims to transfer control over education to states and local communities. While functions like Pell Grants and Title I funding are slated for redistribution to other federal agencies, the department’s closure requires congressional approval. This move has sparked debates about the future of funding distributions and nationwide educational standards.
There have also been federal funding freezes on various scientific research projects, significant cuts to federal research funding, and policy changes that could affect university budgets nationwide. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) faces a $1 billion reduction in research grants, affecting numerous projects and potentially hindering advancements in medical research. In early 2025, the NIH also announced a policy to cap indirect cost reimbursements on research grants at 15%, a significant reduction from previous rates. This policy aimed to reduce federal expenditures by approximately $4 billion annually but faced immediate legal challenges from a coalition of 22 states and numerous research institutions, who argued that such cuts would severely impact essential research activities and associated employment. A federal judge temporarily blocked the policy pending further judicial review.
These shifts have profound implications for research universities, particularly R1 institutions, which rely heavily on federal funding for research and development. Federal grants make up a significant portion of their research budgets, supporting faculty salaries, laboratory equipment, and student scholarships. The reduction or elimination of these funds could result in program reductions, staff layoffs, and slower progress in scientific discoveries. Higher education institutions are not positioned to make up the gaps in overhead costs and research funding, meaning that these financial shortfalls are already having ripple effects. Doctoral students are losing funding, future scientists may choose not to enter certain fields, and lifesaving research cannot move forward. The University of Pennsylvania has already reported a halt on $175 million in federal research funding, highlighting the immediate financial strain and disruption to ongoing research activities.
Beyond research funding, other federal policies could further impact higher education budgets. The administration has called for the elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices on college campuses, with institutions that do not comply potentially facing a loss of federal funding. The evolving landscape of federal funding for higher education necessitates close monitoring and proactive engagement from academic institutions to navigate these changes effectively.
See above for information regarding the attempt to eliminate funding from IMLS and the resolution and binding agreement between ALA and AFSCME to protect against further attacks to library and museum funding.
Links to More Information
ALA and AFSCME Prevail in Fight to Protect Libraries and Museums Nationwide
Upholding Intellectual Freedom
Background/Current Status
Intellectual freedom is a core value of the library profession, and libraries are integral to the provision of spaces and information resources that support their users’ active and free pursuit of the widest variety of information and ideas. Unfortunately, these core library values and functions are under near constant challenge by those who wish to place limitations on the ideas and information to which library users have access. While case law has firmly established publicly funded libraries as public fora protected from state-sponsored censorship, challenges persist. For example, ongoing criticisms of Critical Race Theory have led to efforts by some lawmakers to place limitations on the content that educators, including librarians, can share with the broader public. Importantly, critical race theorists wish to understand how racial inequities persist within institutions and systems—an intellectual pursuit that libraries are well positioned to support. However, numerous public officials, at both the state and federal levels, have moved to introduce legislation meant to curb this pursuit and shape how students discuss this nation’s past and present. Most recently, the Trump Administration signed an Executive Order outlining the need to end “radical, anti-American ideologies” in K-12 public schools, advocating for “Patriotic education.” Additionally, research areas, data, and information related to left-leaning ideology has been removed or edited from various government websites, including identity-based health research, climate change information, reproductive rights, foreign aid, and more; a full list of terms has been published by The New York Times. The loss of information previously shared and made available by the federal government is impacting librarians and researchers, but there are efforts to save information and data before it is taken down. Despite this effort to save federal information and data, some links made available through the Federal Depository Library Program are being affected. The Administration will also not fund research related to these areas, halting much of the critical research work that is being done on college campuses. We speak more about this threat later in this agenda. Further, lack of use of terms will change how researchers approach research, including changing or reverting back to problematic subject headings or terms in library catalogs and databases. Language disclaimers that provided content warnings are also being taken down.
The Trump Administration also has called for the elimination of all Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in federal agencies. This executive order has prompted the Department of Education to give higher education institutions two weeks to eliminate DEI initiatives and programs in their “hiring, compensation, promotion, scholarships, prizes, and sanctions.” Failure to comply will result in an investigation and risk of losing federal funding. Several universities have already had funding cut or reduced due to student protests; a further 60 universities are currently being investigated. The impact to research funding and DEI programs is further discussed in the watchlist.
In the Fall of 2025, the Trump Administration released a Compact for higher education institutions to sign. The Compact calls for schools to agree to a list of demands in exchange for priority research funding support. The American Council on Education released a statement condemning this agreement “...offers nothing less than government control of a university’s basic and necessary freedoms…” While the push for compliance has died down in recent months, some universities are already censoring faculty with the types of research and class topics they are allowed to provide.
Impact on Academic Libraries
Citing Articles I and II of the Library Bill of Rights, libraries are knowledge centers for patrons who want to gain more insight into current issues. Libraries should be able to offer books and documents that examine the history of racism as well as materials that call for social justice. Libraries are involved in challenging disinformation and promoting truth by fighting censorship and providing access to relevant materials from all perspectives. Learning and discussing diversity issues without offering patrons access to theoretical frameworks can lead to an oversimplification of race, ethnicity, power, and privilege. Further, the threat of decreased funding towards higher education institutions negatively impacts them. Traditionally, libraries are the first to feel budget constraints on campus, either reducing the library budget or staff
ACRL’s Position
ACRL's Standards for Libraries in Higher Education contain nine principles reflecting the core roles and contributions of libraries to their institutions, including "Professional Values: Libraries advance professional values of intellectual freedom, intellectual property rights and values, user privacy and confidentiality, collaboration, and user-centered service." In pursuit of these values, the ACRL Plan for Excellence makes specific note of the strategic importance of supporting libraries in advancing issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion and continued access to information. In August 2022, ALA, ACRL, the Public Library Association (PLA), and the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) approved the Cultural Proficiencies for Racial Equities: A Framework. Created by a joint task force, this document provides recommendations for bolstering racial equity within libraries. Libraries are critical providers to information and strongly oppose censorship of information.
Links to More Information
All Information (Except Text) for H.R.3046
Race and Ethnicity in Higher Education (ACE)
SPARC Big Deal Cancellation Tracker
Indirect
HBCUs, TCCUs, & HSIs
On September 15, 2025, the Department of Education released a statement committing a one-time gift donation of $495 million to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Tribal Council Colleges and Universities (TCCUs). The money is supposed to support research programs, upgrade facilities across campuses, and support student and staff services. However, this support comes while the Trump Administration has decided to cut $350 million of funding to Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs). The juxtaposition of supporting some minority-serving institutions, while not supporting HSIs does bring up questions about the reasoning behind the original support. Some educators who work at HBCUs and TCCUs are worried that the allotted money will come with specific stipulations; although none have been named at this time. Many places are especially concerned due to the Administration’s stance on DEIA initiatives, programs, and curriculum on campuses. Further, with the continued dismantling of the Department of Education (see the next section), the cuts to staff in offices that support HBCUs, TCCUs, and HSIs will leave critical gaps that will affect how these colleges support their students.
DACA
One population that has received special attention in recent years is the estimated 800,000 recipients of DACA. While the Trump administration has sent mixed signals about the status of DACA recipients, many have been caught up in recent immigration actions by ICE, adding to the fear and uncertainty of thousands of college students.
As of 2022, 119,000 DACA eligible students were enrolled in higher education. This number has steadily decreased. While renewals continue to be processed, new DACA applications are currently barred by injunction, so the pipeline to DACA status is shrinking.
On January 17, 2025, the Fifth Circuit ruled that key parts of the Biden Administration’s DACA rule are unlawful but limited the impact. Current recipients nationwide can still renew while the case continues and the ruling applies only to Texas, where DACA now provides protection from deportation, but not new work permits or driver’s licenses. For now, there are no nationwide limits on processing pending or initial applications, and current Texas recipients may keep their existing work permits. Further guidance from the court and USCIS is pending and at this time, ongoing uncertainty is the largest issue for DACA recipients in higher education. If DACA is rescinded, hundreds of thousands of individuals will have their work authorizations immediately revoked, and many thousands will be unable to work and pay tuition.
International Students
In the Spring of 2025, the Trump Administration temporarily paused visa applications for students trying to study and enter the United States. In June, that process began once more, but new scrutiny was being made to visa applications, including looking at applicants' social media accounts. In August, the Trump Administration announced new changes to visas to prevent “foreign student visa abuse.” The new stipulations would require students, professors, and researchers (among other categories) to be allowed to stay in the United States for a specific time period - typically the duration of their program, but no more than four years. After that time frame is up, these populations would be required to apply for an extension. This is drastically different from the current policy which stipulates that a student visa allows for them to remain for the “duration of their program.” Now, when international students are considering attending a US institution, they are deciding among a variety of factors - not feeling welcome in the United States, experiencing travel restrictions, and greater scrutiny on their activities both in and outside of the United States.
Due to these and other immigration crackdowns in the United States, there has been a sharp decline in the number of international students who are enrolling at an American university. As of November 2025, that number has dropped to just 17% of first time students. This could have real and lasting impacts on the overall budget for most universities since international students typically pay full tuition. However, the Trump Administration did grant 600,000 Chinese student visas, which raised eyebrows considering the international relationship between China and the United States.
Impact on Academic Libraries
Although the above issues are not directly impacting academic librarians ability to serve their community, these areas have caused ripple effects throughout higher education and the campus communities libraries serve. From cuts to funding, to a reduced amount of international students attending campus, all creates an environment that cannot fully support students. Less students that have access to assistance or access to higher education has trickle down effects to libraries.
2. Public Access to Reliable Governmental Data
Background
During the first half of 2025, multiple news outlets reported that historical government data was being removed or modified in ways that appeared to align with the current administration’s political agenda. In response to growing concerns about data integrity and public access, the Library Innovation Lab at Harvard Law School announced in February 2025 that it had created a comprehensive archive of federal public datasets linked through Data.gov. The Lab made this archive publicly available as part of its Public Data Project, an initiative designed to ensure that critical government information remains accessible regardless of changes in political leadership, funding priorities, or the risk of accidental loss.
By October 2025, the Library Innovation Lab expanded its efforts, continuing to preserve and distribute datasets amid ongoing concerns about federal data transparency. At the same time, broader federal actions intensified scrutiny and following directives tied to the current administration’s policies, including the removal of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) content from government websites, several agencies began altering publicly available information.
Notably, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) removed or revised scientific data related to childhood vaccinations, including information emphasizing the importance of immunizing newborns. Reports indicated that since October 2025, the number of routinely recommended vaccines referenced on official platforms had decreased from 13 to 7. In place of prior guidance, some materials began highlighting disputed claims, including suggested links between vaccines and autism, and promoting a “shared clinical decision-making” model. While this approach encourages consultation with healthcare providers, critics argue it may enable vaccine hesitancy by allowing parents to opt out of immunizations despite medical advice. These unreviewed changes are leading to more outbreaks of once-manageable diseases across the nation. Early indicators suggest a rise in outbreaks of diseases that were previously well-controlled through routine immunization, underscoring the potential long-term consequences of reduced access to accurate, evidence-based public health information.
Many librarians and researchers are now creating groups to preserve government data for future researchers. Groups such as, Data Rescue Project, and Environmental Data and Governance Initiative, are creating websites with saved government information before they are deleted or manipulated. Many librarians are adding wording about missing and/or skewed government information to their library guides in order to better inform the public about what they are seeing, or NOT seeing, on government websites. If information seems to be missing, librarians are encouraging people to search for archives of missing federal webpages in the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
Links to More Information
Why are data nerds racing to save government statistics?
In Remembrance Of Dearly Departed Federal Datasets
Federal datasets are essential infrastructure for American lives and livelihoods
Q&A with US Government Information Librarian at Stanford University
3. Elimination and Reorganization of Federal Agencies & Departments
IMLS
Background
The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) is the primary source of federal funding for libraries through the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA). IMLS generally receives its funding through the annual appropriations process, with spending limits established each year through the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, along with other related agencies’ appropriations subcommittees. In FY2024, LSTA provided $211 million for libraries in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Territories, and Freely Associated States through the Grants to States program, the National Leadership Grants for Libraries, the Laura Bush 21st Century Librarian Program, the Native American Library Services, and other grant programs. View the most recent grants and funding that have supported libraries across the United States on the IMLS website.
In March 2025, Congress passed the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025 (H.R. 1968), which provides funding for federal agencies, including the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), through September 30, 2025. This act maintains funding levels comparable to FY2024, ensuring continued support for programs such as the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA). However, on the same day, an Executive Order was issued directing the phased elimination of IMLS, creating uncertainty about the agency's future. This Executive Order directed federal agencies, including IMLS, to scale down operations to the legal minimum required and could significantly impact library funding, research initiatives, and community programs nationwide.
Impact on Libraries
The IMLS is the largest source of federal funding for libraries. Through its grant programs, the IMLS helps support innovative research in academic libraries, as well as impactful programming and training opportunities for librarianship at large. However, recent executive actions have raised concerns about the future of IMLS funding.
Current Status
ALA filed a lawsuit challenging the Administration’s actions in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and in May 2025, ALA’s lawsuit won a temporary restraining order, preventing mass layoffs of IMLS employees days before they were scheduled to take effect. In November, the District Court of Rhode Island permanently struck down the executive order eliminating the IMLS citing violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The Trump administration has now appealed that decision in the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit the Court.
In the meantime, on December 3, 2025, the IMLS announced that it would be reinstating all federal grants. In February 2026, a package of spending bills were passed and signed into law which included funding for the U.S. departments of Education and Health and Human Services. The final legislation includes funding for the IMLS. The legislation does not require the Trump administration to halt efforts to shift Education Department programs to other agencies, but does require the department to consult more closely with Congress on the status of its efforts to shift responsibilities to other agencies.
Even with funding restored, and the danger of the elimination of the IMLS currently off the table, concerns remain. Since March 2025, Deputy Secretary of Labor Keith E. Sonderling has been Acting Director of the IMLS. On Feb 10, 2026, Sonderling wrote an opinion piece for The Hill, which was later reproduced on the IMLS website, that the IMLS would be steering museums and libraries away from telling storied focus on the “less fortunate parts of American history.” He also introduced the Freedom Trucks project, partnering with Praeger University to create mobile history exhibits. Critics have voiced concern that under Sonderling IMLS funds are steered towards political propaganda.
ACRL’s Position
On December 3, 2025, ALA issued a statement welcoming the reinstatement of IMLS grants. Continued advocacy by ACRL and ALA is vital each year to ensure that IMLS is able to maintain or increase funding in order to support equitable and innovative library services. In light of recent executive actions, ALA has provided a FAQ document to help library professionals and advocates understand the potential consequences of these changes.
Links to More Information
FY2025 IMLS Congressional Justification
IMLS Statement of Agency’s Reinstatement of Terminated IMLS Grants
Department of Education
Background
The Department of Education was created by Congress in 1979 with a charge including to strengthen the Federal commitment to ensuring access to equal educational opportunity for every individual, to improve the coordination of Federal education programs.
On March 11, 2025, the Department of Education laid off about 50% of staff, while the rest of the employees were placed on administrative leave on March 21, 2025. This was followed, on March 20th, by an executive order to dismantle the Department Education as much as is consistent with the law.
Current
The Department of Education can only be eliminated by an act of Congress. Bills have been introduced, but have failed to make progress. To dismantle the Department of Education without completely eliminating it, the current administration has distributed the responsibilities of the DOE to other agencies, indicating that the law is being met by these agencies performing their duties in collaboration with or under the oversight of the DOE. Elementary, Secondary, and Post Secondary Education would now be managed by the Department of Labor.
According to the National Education Association (NEA), many expect the White House to move the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights to the Department of Justice and anticipate that this may weaken defenses against discrimination based on race, gender, and disability. Student Loan Administration. Federal Student Loans will be administered by the Small Business Administration, although this has not been finalized. As of mid-March 2026, it was announced that the Department of the Treasury would be taking over administrating student loans. The Department of Education will still administer the policies and programs like PSLF and Pell Grants (to name a few), but the Treasury will be in charge of student loan payments directly. This move is in alignment with the interagency partnership that was signed in 2025 (linked at bottom of webpage above) between the two agencies to help “clean-up” the student loan debt amount.
Student Loans and the SAVE Act
In October of 2024, a U.S. federal court issued an injunction preventing the Department of Education from using parts of the SAVE (Saving on a Valuable Education) and other Income Driven Repayment Plans that Former President Biden created towards his goal to eliminate student loan debt. Current borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan have been placed in forbearance while this is fully decided in the courts. In March 2026, a federal district court dismissed the case entirely for dismantling the SAVE plan, but this dismissal still leaves a lot of questions since the Department of Education has been drastically reduced and the Trump Administration wants to eliminate the variety of repayment plan options for borrowers. The remaining plans raise the cost of monthly payments for borrowers significantly, including a new repayment plan, the Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP). Only Income Driven Repayment plans are eligible for PSLF, which most academic librarians qualify for, but processing and approving applications is going to be slow as many borrowers try to move off of the SAVE plan.
H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill, further impacted student loans. In addition to the ending of the Save Act, new student loan limits were enacted, GradPlus Loans were eliminated, and the number of payments before loan forgiveness were increased. The new student loan caps on advanced degrees will especially have a massive impact on the amount of graduate students who will be pursuing Master’s or PhD programs. This will have a ripple effect on many industries - less students in programs will result in labor shortages and will also have a direct impact on budgets at colleges and universities.
There are many questions about the future of student loans due to the department’s elimination. This uncertainty is affecting current academic librarians who qualify for PSLF grants and could negatively influence students looking to go to college in the future and/or pursue advanced degrees.
Impact on Libraries
The downsizing and dismantling of the Department of Education impacts the student loans of many librarians pursuing loan forgiveness as well as future librarians needing to borrow in order to obtain their degrees. Degrees in Library and Information Science are not included in the category of “Professional Degrees” which are permitted higher student loan caps.
Academic libraries could be impacted as academic institutions are affected as a whole. It has been proposed that postsecondary education will be managed by the Department of Labor, focusing institutions of higher education on workforce development. This includes administration of DOE grants. The DOE and DOL were created with vastly different charges and employ staff with different expertise and they will differ in the ways in which they support academic institutions, enforce policies, and administer grants.
Academic libraries are fundamentally tied to research and academic freedom. The instability of the DOE as well as federal efforts to sway the priorities of higher education toward particular fields and to influence the way information is taught and presented is likely to cause continued instability for higher education in general and academic libraries specifically.
ACRL’s Position
In November 2025, in response to the s ALA released the statement ALA Sounds Alarm as White House Undermines Programs Supporting School and Academic Libraries.
Links to Additional Information
In Trump’s First Year, At Least $12 Billion in School Funding Disruptions - EdWeek
ED and DOL: Postsecondary Education Partnership Fact Sheet
Library Of Congress and the Copyright Office
Background
In November 2025, H.R. 6028 was introduced by Rep. Griffith of Virginia. This bill proposes significant changes to the appointment and management of several key legislative branch positions, including the Librarian of Congress, the Director of the Government Publishing Office, and the Register of Copyrights. The bill establishes new appointment processes and removes the supervisory authority of the Librarian of Congress over the Copyright Office, making the role of Register of Copyrights a position directly appointed by the President of the United States.
Current Status
H.R. 6028 remains in committee.
ACRL’s Position
In December 2025, American Library Association and Association of Research Libraries joined several additional advocacy groups in a letter addressed to Hon. Mike Johnson, Speaker Members of the U.S. Committee on House Administration, encouraging slow and deliberate consideration of the many impacts of H.R. 6028. In the letter, the groups point out that what may appear to be simple administrative reorganization can have major unforeseen consequences if not examined carefully, and highlight concerns about the Library’s ability to grow and sustain its collections, the Copyright Office’s ability to maintain the registration system and provide unbiased policy guidance on copyright and related issues, and other functions of the two entities could be threatened by separating them without due consideration.
Impact on Libraries
As stated in the public comment letter on H.R.6028, separating the Library of Congress from the U.S. Copyright Office without due consideration could impact the Library’s ability to grow and sustain its collections, as well as the Copyright Office’s ability to maintain the registration system and provide unbiased policy guidance on copyright and related issues.
Links to More information
4. Safety, Security, and Ethical Concerns of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Background
On November 24, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order calling for “a national effort to accelerate the application of AI for transformative scientific discovery focused on pressing national challenges.” The Executive Order described the effort as “comparable in urgency and ambition to the Manhattan Project.”
The safety and security of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a critical concern as AI systems evolve and become increasingly and seamlessly integrated into various aspects of our daily lives, transforming various aspects of how we live, work, and interact. According to a 2021 HubSpot survey, 63% of respondents did not realize they were using AI in their daily interactions with technology. The HubSpot 2023 survey indicates that 53% of professionals agree that most people will use more chatbots like ChatGPT to answer their questions instead of search engines like Google. Suppose we translate these statistics to the library field. In that case, some librarians might not be aware that some of the built systems in their library system or information resources use machine learning and AI to manage large datasets.
The prevailing legal structure relies heavily on applying rules and regulations across various domains, including product liability, data privacy, intellectual property, anti-discrimination measures, and workplace rights. The American Bar Association also indicates that employers’ use of AI tools is subject to federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination and emerging state and local laws specific to AI. Self-regulatory bodies and standards groups play a role in shaping the AI governing framework. Consequently, legal frameworks and ethical guidelines are essential to ensure its safe and responsible use in libraries and higher education institutions.
Current Status
The last United States Administration took significant steps to address the safety and security of AI. On October 30, 2023, Former President Biden issued an Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence. This order established new standards and directed actions to strengthen AI safety and manage associated risks. However, on January 23, 2025 President Donald Trump signed an executive order revoking some Biden-era programs promoting the safe use of artificial intelligence. States continue to establish policies for the safe use of AI.
AI has drawn bipartisan interest, as legislators persistently work to support and regulate AI platforms as they explode into the mainstream. As technology is intricately connected with information creation and access, continuously developing new and emerging technologies requires consistent monitoring. Emerging technologies are novel, fast-growing, and result in a significant impact or change, yet are uncertain or ambiguous due to their rapid evolution. Augmented, mixed, and virtual reality, often referred to as XR or Extended Reality, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and Generative AI, are among the most rapidly developing technologies impacting libraries in higher education. Each represents a sea change in content creation, impacting how we work, learn, and communicate. Because these powerful applications are novel and rapidly changing, there is concern for educator training and university policy regarding best practices. Academic libraries play a critical role in teaching responsible emerging technology use in teaching, learning, and research. In May 2023, the U.S. Office of Educational Technology published a report on AI guiding appropriate use and assistance in developing educational policy.
U.S. House and Senate committees held nearly three dozen hearings on AI in 2023 alone, and more than 30 AI-focused bills have been introduced in the previous Congress (118th) that have an impact on safety, security, and literacy, including the following:
- H.R.3369: The Artificial Intelligence Accountability Act mandates that mediators embrace stringent practices during AI development and deployment. These practices center around compliance, risk management, and ethical considerations. While this poses challenges, it simultaneously paves the way for innovation and leadership in responsible AI. This act stresses the importance of human review and decision-making authority, particularly in critical decisions affecting individuals’ rights or safety. This bill has been introduced and reported by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce but has not yet been enacted into law.
- H.R.5077: The Creating Resources for Every American to Experiment with the Artificial Intelligence Act of 2023 (CREATE AI Act). The CREATE AI Act creates the National Artificial Intelligence Research Resource (NAIRR) as a common national research infrastructure offering AI researchers and students from diverse backgrounds significant access to the intricate resources, data, and tools required to develop safe and responsible AI.
- H.R.9197: Small Business Artificial Intelligence Advancement Act: While primarily aimed at small businesses, this bill directs the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to develop resources for AI adoption. Libraries could leverage these resources to integrate AI technologies safely and effectively, enhancing their services and operations. This bill was introduced and passed by the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. However, it has not yet been voted on by the full House or Senate.
- H.R.6791: The AI Literacy Act would codify AI literacy as a critical component of digital literacy and create opportunities to incorporate AI literacy into existing programs, according to a bill summary provided by the lawmakers. The bill also would highlight the importance of AI literacy for national competitiveness, workforce preparedness, and Americans' well-being and digital safety. This bill would ramp up efforts to increase AI literacy in public elementary and secondary schools, community colleges, institutions of higher education, and community institutions like nonprofits and libraries through competitive grants. The bill has been referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology but has not progressed further.
- H.R.4103: The Virtual Reality Technologies Enabling Coaching and Honing Skills in Government Act of 2019 encourages the use of virtual technologies in the federal workforce. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform; thus far, no further revisions have been made public. As of July 28, 2023, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition, Foreign Agriculture, and Horticulture. It has not progressed further in the legislative process.
- H.R.3211: The Immersive Technology for the American Workforce Act of 2023 provides grant funding to community colleges and technical training centers to develop immersive technology in education and workforce development. The bill has been forwarded to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce for further consideration. The bill has been referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce but has not progressed further in the legislative process.
Additionally, in January 2024, the US Government Accountability Office issued a report recommending additional oversight and the development of contingency planning to ensure secure operations for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Department of Transportation (DoT). At the state level, Bryan Cave Leight Paisner (BCLP), a legislation and trend analysis organization, developed a state-by-state AI legislation tracker with the latest on state bills under consideration.
In February 2024, speaker Mike Johnson and Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries announced a bipartisan Task Force on Artificial Intelligence to ensure U.S. leadership in AI innovation while considering safeguards against emerging threats. The taskforce report was released in December 2024 and would likely be a key resource for shaping AI policy, aiming to ensure America’s leadership in AI innovation while implementing necessary safeguards to protect Americans. The current administration repealed President Biden’s Executive Order 14110 which may lead to reduced regulation of AI use and innovation.
At the institutional level, some higher education institutions have not set policies or guidelines for using AI, often deferring to faculty judgment at the classroom level. Other colleges and universities have revised their academic integrity policies to add AI or created new policies. Northern Illinois University has an ongoing compilation of AI class policies from various U.S. higher education institutions. Some higher education institutions have also established task forces, which include a librarian to address AI concerns and develop strategies and policies that promote academic integrity and authentic scholarship.
Environmental Impact
In the past four years, legislative efforts have begun addressing the sustainability of data centers, notably through Division Z (Energy Act of 2020) in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (H.R. 133), the only law so far to partially tackle this issue. The rise of AI technologies, especially large-scale models, has amplified the environmental impact, with significant energy, water, and carbon emissions during training. The "Artificial Intelligence Environmental Impacts Act of 2024" (S.3732) highlights the environmental concerns of AI, requiring the EPA to conduct a study on AI’s environmental effects and establish a voluntary reporting system, underscoring the need for sustainable AI practices alongside efforts to improve data center efficiency.
A March 2025 report from Harvard Law School titled “Extracting Profits from the Public: How Utility Ratepayers Are Paying for Big Tech’s Power” discusses how major companies like Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft are securing electricity for their energy-heavy data centers, driving competition among regional utilities and passing the costs onto the public through higher electricity prices. This paper reviews nearly 50 regulatory proceedings and reveals how existing and new rate structures, along with secret contracts, may transfer energy costs from dominant tech companies to consumers.
Impact on Libraries
While specific AI legislation targeting libraries in the United States remains limited, it is crucial for libraries to actively monitor advancements in AI safety, security, and governance at a broader level. With AI technology rapidly transforming various sectors, libraries must proactively address critical concerns such as privacy, data protection, and ethical responsibilities. By staying ahead of emerging trends and fostering a thoughtful approach to integrating AI tools, libraries can ensure they continue to serve as trusted stewards of information and protect their patrons' rights in an increasingly digital world.
Librarians have continuously played an essential role in providing library instruction on academic integrity and teaching information skills, such as evaluating information, whether written information or sources of information, since the internet's inception. “Cheating is not a new problem: schools have survived calculators, Google, Wikipedia, essays for pay websites, and more…” (Heaven, 2023, p. 45). Academic librarians, with their rich history and adaptability, are uniquely poised to tackle the challenges presented by AI. In the context of AI, librarians explore machine translation, create incubation spaces, integrate robotics, and refine metadata using AI technology.
Libraries have been transitioning from desktop library systems to more automated cloud library systems, which has impacted the role of librarians, eliminating some positions. However, AI brings an opportunity to create new ones and to upskill and reskill academic librarians. Challenges may surface if funding for library technology is deprioritized in support of other sectors. Libraries often rely on federal aid to integrate cutting-edge technologies, and without adequate funding, they may struggle to adopt AI tools or maintain existing tech-driven services. Furthermore, ethical concerns surrounding AI, such as data privacy and bias and environmental impacts, could impact how libraries implement these technologies.
ACRL’s Position
ACRL supports using AI tools and is considering incorporating AI into the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, according to an interview with Leo Lo, ACRL president-elect. In the summer of 2024, the ACRL AI Competencies for Library Workers Task Force was created with the charge to develop AI competencies for library workers that align with the evolving needs of academic libraries.
In November 2024, C&RL News published the Artificial Intelligence Disclosure (AID) Framework which promotes transparency in the use of AI tools in education and may help librarians clearly explain how AI supports student work and instructional tasks like lesson planning, rubric creation, and curriculum mapping. Librarians can choose to incorporate an AID Statement in assessment materials, syllabi, or learning management systems to ensure clarity and openness about AI integration.
In the beginning of the current administration, an executive order titled REMOVING BARRIERS TO AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE was signed, revoking previous initiatives (Executive Order 14110: Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence) by the Biden administration to promote the safe and responsible use of AI, which required a collaborative approach from government, the private sector, academia, and civil society, with a focus on government accountability. The current executive order states that “to maintain this leadership, we must develop AI systems that are free from ideological bias or engineered social agendas.” This shift could undermine efforts to promote information literacy by restricting access to reliable information and educational initiatives, potentially harming critical thinking, media literacy, and long-term societal and democratic well-being.
Watchlist
There are additional issues of great concern to academic librarians that are not included above because there is no pending legislation, no current action, or have important information that could impact academic and research libraries. Nevertheless, if legislation does arise or becomes necessary, ACRL will advocate for the best interests of academic and research libraries by relying on past precedent and current analysis.
1. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival (DACA)
The DACA program, established by the Obama Administration in 2012, protects individuals brought to the United States as children from deportation, remains in litigation. In 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a memorandum to rescind DACA. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the rescission in 2018 and required DHS to continue accepting renewal applications (National Law Review, November 12, 2018). The Supreme Court overturned the Trump Administration’s termination of DACA in a 2020 decision, finding that doing so violated the Administrative Procedure Act. In January 2021, President Biden issued an executive order reinstating DACA. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas declared DACA unlawful in July 2021, but issued a partial stay of its order which allows DHS to continue to accept initial, as well as renew, DACA requests. However, the stay permits DHS to only approve renewal requests and prohibits DHS from approving initial DACA requests. On Aug. 30, 2022, DHS published the DACA Final Rule, with the intent to preserve and fortify the DACA policy. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals later partially affirmed the district court’s decision but retained the partial stay. The DACA Final Rule went into effect on October 31, 2022.
The litigation fight has continued, with a coalition of DACA allies attempting to help the federal government defend the program. The Southern District of Texas ruled that DACA was illegal again in September 2023. In response New York Attorney General Letitia James marshaled a group of 23 state attorney generals to oppose the Texas ruling, filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on February 1, 2024. Attorney General James argues that the Executive Branch has the authority to carry out DACA and highlights the many ways that DACA assists state and local governments. U.S. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (Illinois) is pressing hard in the U.S. Senate to not only protect DACA but also promote citizenship for Dreamers.
On Jan. 17, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled on the DACA Final Rule. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will continue processing DACA renewal requests and related employment authorization applications, as outlined in 8 CFR 236.22 and 236.23. While USCIS will accept initial DACA requests, it will not process them at this time and current DACA grants and Employment Authorization Documents will remain valid until their expiration, unless individually terminated.
As of March 2025, new bills are being introduced and progressing through Congress, many aiming to restrict immigrant benefits (H.R. 746: America First Act and S. 62: America First Act), intensify deportations, or boost border security. These developments, alongside the new administration’s agenda, signal a growingly hostile and uncertain environment for undocumented immigrants in the U.S.
The ACRL Board of Directors has publicly recognized DACA students, faculty, and staff in higher education—many of whom also work in libraries—as important and valued members of the academic community. The loss of these groups who “contribute their unique perspectives” would “harm intellectual freedom by removing the voices of vulnerable groups from the scholarly discourse, and would jeopardize the invaluable cultural enrichment brought to our campuses by immigrant students, faculty and staff.”
2. Consumer Data Privacy
Consumer Data Privacy deals with the right of consumers to be aware and in control of how their personal data is being used and sold by online companies. More states have been working on consumer data privacy laws, several of which went into effect at the beginning of 2025; the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) tracks the current status of legislation in each state.
Although the 119th Congress has not addressed the American Data Privacy and Protection Act, H.R.8152, several bills related to privacy have been introduced related to protecting data for American citizens. The first one was introduced to the House on February 11, 2025, H.R.1101 tries to provide protection against the unlawful access of the payment system in the Bureau of the Fiscal Service within the Department of the Treasury. The second bill, H.R.1602 was introduced to the House on March 5, 2025. It asks that the Secretary of the Treasury provide greater transparency and protections around Bank Secrecy Act reports.
3. Affordable College Textbook Act
Background
The Affordable College Textbook Act addresses a critical challenge to college affordability. The increasing cost of textbooks has drawn the attention of students, parents, faculty, and institutions across the higher education sector. Textbooks are often overlooked costs for students and can ultimately be the deciding factor if students decide to go to college or choose to take or complete a course. As a result, legislation has been introduced to combat these rising costs and support the use of open textbooks and other open educational resources. In the 117th Congress, U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL), Angus King (I-ME), Tina Smith (D-MN), and Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), along with U.S. Representative Joe Neguse (D-CO), introduced the Affordable College Textbook Act to both houses of Congress. Although the act was not passed, it has been reintroduced, most recently in both houses in the 118th Congress, and has helped to spark a grant program, the Open Textbook Pilot Program, which awards grant money to institutions that want to explore Open Educational Resources (OER). Through the focus of OER initiatives, the federal government began to realize that additional recommendations needed to be made for higher education institutions to increase access to all types of resources and research. The Affordable College Textbook Act aims to permanently authorize funds for a grant program for the creation of OER. The grant money can be used in some of the following ways: the provision of funding for professional development around the open textbook process, the creation or adaptation of open textbooks, the development of supplemental material, or the facilitation of research surrounding open textbooks and OER material correlated to student success and cost savings.
Although the Affordable College Textbook Act itself has not moved forward yet, Congress has funded the pilot projects outlined in the legislation through the Open Textbook Pilot Grant Program, first funded in 2018. Since the start of the pilot program, $54 million has been awarded. In 2024, the appropriations bill provided $7 million for grants towards this program.
The Affordable College Textbook Act was reintroduced in the Senate on March 27, 2023, by U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL), Angus King (I-ME), Tina Smith (D-MN), and Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ). The bill, S.978, was referred back to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee and was reintroduced again to the Senate. This version of the bill included updated information about the cost of textbooks and authorized a grant program (similar to the Open Textbook Pilot Grant) that would help universities expand access to open textbooks. This program would create more support for faculty to develop open material. The bill also calls on publishers and institutions to be more transparent about the cost of textbooks and requirements for course material, along with disclosing how publishers are using student data. Rep. Joe Neguse (D-CO) introduced the House companion bill, H.R. 1811.
In a related vein, the Biden Administration, working through the Department of Education, attempted to prevent automatic charges for textbooks along with other “junk fees” in higher education as announced in a March 15, 2024 release. Some colleges make agreements with textbook vendors to automatically bill students for textbook costs, thereby denying students the opportunity to seek out low-price, used, or open access texts. This practice runs counter to the principles of the Affordable College Textbook Act, as noted in a letter by Senator Tina Smith (D-MN).
Current Status
On February 26, 2025, Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL), Angus King (I-ME), Tina Smith (D-MN), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) reintroduced the Affordable College Textbook Act. In the House, U.S. Representative Joe Neguse (D-CO-02) introduced companion legislation. ACRL’s Executive Board endorsed the Affordable College Textbook Act as noted in ACRL Speaks Out(ACRL endorsed the Act in 2015 and 2022). As of March 2026, this bill remains in committee.
Despite funds being allocated, the Open Textbook Pilot Grant Program awarded no grants in FY2025, which can be attributed to reorganization of the Department of Education, spending freezes, and government shutdowns. On January 20, 2026, House and Senate Appropriations Committees jointly released bipartisan text for the Fiscal Year 2026 Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill, including $7 million for the Open Textbook Pilot. This funding directs the Department of Education to launch a new grant competition later in 2026, expected in late spring or summer.
Impact on Academic Libraries
Academic librarians are concerned with the affordability of higher education and the negative impact rising textbook costs have on student success. Campus libraries are known for facilitating free access to information resources through curated print and digital collections, course materials that faculty make available through library reserve systems, and interlibrary loan services. Due to continuing effects on higher education from the pandemic, librarians are also being asked to create resources for a digital environment as well. College and university campuses are key locations sharing this content, encouraging open educational resources and their adaption for coursework, and expanding the corpus of openly available course content. As part of the commitment to embedding information literacy and access to quality resources into the student experience and strategies for teaching and learning, librarians are working with their academic colleagues to create such resources and to offer them freely for others.
On a related note, some universities are now experimenting with a Direct to Open model of publication for monographs, such as seen in the Big Ten Academic Alliance’s agreement with MIT Press or the Lever Press for liberal arts colleges. This model involves libraries collectively providing funding to make books open access immediately upon publication. By contributing, libraries can access an entire collection of open access books from a publisher rather than purchasing individual titles. While this model is used for primarily monographs at the current time, some of these monographs could be utilized as course texts, and libraries may wish to consider whether the model could support textbook publication in the future.
ACRL’s Position
ACRL supports the legislation that makes college textbooks affordable, having joined 14 other organizations to support the Affordable College Textbook Act on its initial introduction to Congress and again on its 2025 reintroduction. This legislation’s aim at equity of access to higher education reflects ACRL’s core values. Under the aegis of the proposed legislation, ACRL also supports continued funding for the Open Textbook Pilot Program along with the creation of open materials.
Links to More Information
Program award page (U.S. Department of Education)
H.R.1886 - Affordable College Textbook Act
4. Accessible Instructional Materials
Campus libraries act as central points of access for instructional content. The development of accessibility guidelines for instructional materials will ensure this content is accessible to all. Proposed legislation, H.R.4643 the Accessible Instructional Materials in Higher Education Act - AIM Higher Act, seeks to promote the development of voluntary guidelines for postsecondary electronic instruction materials and related technologies. This bill is currently being reviewed by the House Committee on Education and Labor. Coursework materials are increasingly delivered in digital forms with e-books, PDF articles, and interactive web content delivered from learning management systems, databases, and the open web. Whereas traditional tangible print items present obstacles to students with disabilities, digital content offers opportunities to expand accessibility for these students. What’s more, reform efforts will provide an opportunity to consolidate and refine existing standards to ensure their alignment with current accessibility best practices.
The National Center on Accessible Educational Materials, an organization funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs, dedicates a section of its web site to higher education that includes links to current federal laws and policies. The Center also published a guide in 2020, Higher Education Critical Components of the Quality Indicators for the Provision of Accessible Educational Materials & Accessible Technologies. This guide can provide broad benchmarks and ideas to ACRL members with teaching responsibilities while legislative efforts continue to unfold.
Special Note: The revolution in artificial intelligence has implications for accessible instructional materials. Recent articles by McMurtie (2023) and Onufur (2024) list examples of how AI can increase accessibility: translating text-to-speech, brainstorming research ideas, generating images of text in class notes or textbooks, offering social scripts to students unsure of how to interact with classmates about group work, and helping students organize study materials. The National Conference of State Legislatures website offers a tracker for AI legislation at the state level. Even though AI legislation will more likely apply to information literacy for librarians, accessibility to AI is also relevant to ACRL. Massachusetts H 560 is an example of general AI legislation, which includes “a person’s ability to access.”
5. Net Neutrality
Background
Network neutrality is the principle that internet service providers should treat all data equally and should not discriminate or provide preference to any data regardless of its source, content, or destination. Whether legislation is needed to ensure this kind of access has become a focal point in the debate over telecommunications reform. Those opposed to access mandates claim that such action goes against the long-standing policy to keep the Internet as free as possible from regulation and argue that the state of the Internet before this attempted regulation has allowed for commercial innovation and growth.
In 2015, the Obama Administration asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to rule in favor of net neutrality by reclassifying broadband as a common carrier under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 and Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In February 2015, the FCC approved reclassifying high-speed internet as a telecommunications service rather than an information one, subjecting providers to regulation. In December 2017, the FCC voted in favor of repealing these policies, 3–2, along party lines. In a March 2017 letter to the FCC before the repeal vote, ACRL joined with several other associations in asserting that, “preserving the unimpeded flow of information over the public internet and ensuring equitable access for all people is critical to our nation’s social, cultural, educational, and economic well-being.” In February 2018, ALA again affirmed that “Net Neutrality is essential to the promotion and practice of intellectual freedom and the free exercise of democracy.” More extensive background on net neutrality issues can be found in the links to more information provided below.
In July 2021, Former President Biden called on the FCC to restore net neutrality rules in an Executive Order. Jessica Rosenworcel was confirmed by the Senate as FCC chairwoman in December 2021 and has signaled renewed interest in the issue. On January 28, 2022, a U.S. Court of Appeals upheld California’s net neutrality law, saying the 2017 decision by the FCC to reverse federal internet protections could not bar state action. In July 2022, Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) introduced a bill to make net neutrality a federal law, but it has not advanced beyond being introduced. Biden’s other nominee to the FCC, Gigi Sohn, was not confirmed in 2022. Sohn was reintroduced as a nominee in 2023 but has withdrawn their nomination leaving the FCC deadlocked. In May of 2023, President Biden announced a new nominee, Anna M. Gomez, who was confirmed by the Senate in September 2023 and was subsequently sworn in as a Commissioner that same month breaking the deadlock. In October 2023 the FCC voted 3 - 2 to start proceedings on reestablishing open Internet protections.
In April 2024, the FCC adopted a Declaratory Ruling, Order, Report and Order on Reconsideration restoring Net Neutrality enhancing the FCC’s authority to better safeguard access to IP-based telecommunications relay services, ensure access and usability of broadband by individuals with disabilities, and ensure quality of emergency communications by persons with disabilities. These rules would become effective as of July 22, 2024.
On July 12, 2024 the court placed the rules on hold as it reviewed industry legal challenges and in August, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals temporarily blocked net neutrality rules and scheduled oral arguments for late October or early November.
Current Status
On January 2, 2025, in Ohio Telecom Ass'n v. FCC, the US Appeals Court for the Sixth Circuit struck down the FCC's attempt to reinstate net neutrality rules. Internet service providers (ISP) are no longer required to treat all internet traffic equally, potentially allowing them to prioritize certain content or charge different rates for access. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr released a statement in support of the decision. Individual state regulations continue to be in effect, including in California, New York, Colorado, and Oregon.
On January 17th, the ALA filed a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief affirming universal service, E-Rate Program and the essential roles of libraries. Several other groups also filed briefs (Free Press, Public Knowledge, Open Technology Institute and the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society). The petition by these groups argues that the decision by the 6th Circuit U.S. Appeals Court decision conflicts with earlier court decisions.
2025-2026 Updates:
ALA response on September 30, 2025:
Public-Interest Groups Decline to Seek Supreme Court Review of Aug 8 25 - FCC Open Internet Rules
State updates:
https://www.maine.gov/housedems/news/kessler-bill-establish-net-neutrality-standards-maine-now-law
Assembled by the ACRL Government Relations Committee:
Natalie Marquez, Chair – University of California, Irvine
Nancy Calabrese, Vice-Chair - Marist College
Millie Gonzalez - New York Institute of Technology
Kaitlyn Tanis – University of Delaware
Jim Abernathy - Abernathy Disability Law, LLC
Sarah Morris - University of Georgia Libraries
Samantha Bishop Simmons - University of Kansas
Sarah McHone-Chase - Aurora University
Kate Tallman - Illinois State University Milner Library
With generous support and direction provided by:
Teresa Anderson – ACRL Staff Liaison
Kara Whatley – University of Missouri (ACRL Division Councilor)
Laura Hall - University of Kentucky (ACRL Chapters Council Liaison)
