In 2025, Shira Perlmutter, the former Register of the U.S. Copyright Office, filed a high-profile lawsuit against the Trump administration challenging her abrupt removal from office. The lawsuit alleges that her firing was unlawful and violated the constitutional separation of powers, holding that only the Librarian of Congress has authority to appoint or remove the Copyright Office Director, not the President.
Background to the Dispute
Shira Perlmutter was appointed Register of Copyrights in 2020 by then Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden, serving as the head of the U.S. Copyright Office responsible for registering copyrights and advising Congress on copyright law. In May 2025, shortly after President Trump fired Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden via email, Perlmutter was notified by the White House that her position was terminated effective immediately.
The administration sought to appoint Todd Blanche, the Deputy Attorney General, as the acting Librarian of Congress, triggering a legal and administrative crisis as Perlmutter’s staff refused to recognize the new leadership. The clash raised fundamental constitutional questions about executive authority over a legislative branch entity like the Library of Congress.
Legal Claims in the Lawsuit
Perlmutter’s lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., contends that the President lacks the authority under law and Congress’s original statutory scheme to dismiss the Register of Copyrights directly, as that power rests solely with the Librarian of Congress. Consequently, it argues that the President’s attempts to install an acting librarian and remove Perlmutter were “unlawful and ineffective.”
The lawsuit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent Todd Blanche from exercising authority as acting Librarian of Congress and requests that Perlmutter’s removal be declared invalid.
Context and Significance
This legal fight comes amid the Copyright Office’s release of a controversial report on artificial intelligence and copyright law, which drew attention to how AI-generated content intersects with intellectual property rights. Perlmutter’s firing raised concerns about political interference in copyright oversight and the delicate balance between legislative independence and executive power.
The removal also sparked criticism from lawmakers and copyright advocates who view the abrupt changes as a politically motivated power grab undermining the stability and impartiality of the Copyright Office.
Court Proceedings and Developments
A federal judge denied Perlmutter’s initial emergency request for reinstatement, ruling she had not demonstrated irreparable harm sufficient to justify immediate relief. Nevertheless, the case remains active with upcoming hearings to resolve the broader constitutional and statutory questions raised.
The dispute highlights unprecedented turmoil in an agency traditionally viewed as calm and apolitical, with staff reportedly uncertain about leadership and the direction of copyright policy amid ongoing litigation and administrative upheaval.
Conclusion
The Trump administration Copyright Office director lawsuit underscores critical tensions between executive power and legislative branch independence, especially concerning agencies like the Library of Congress that serve unique constitutional functions. As the case proceeds, its outcomes could establish landmark precedents defining the limits of presidential authority over independent government offices and shape the future of intellectual property governance in the age of artificial intelligence.
Shira Perlmutter’s challenge reflects broader concerns about political interference in federal agencies vital to creativity, innovation, and the rule of law, highlighting the ongoing battle to preserve institutional autonomy amidst turbulent political transitions.
