(DailyChive.com) – A Trump-appointed judge has denied Shira Perlmutter’s request for reinstatement as Copyright Office director, potentially reshaping the balance of power between Congress and the executive branch.
At a Glance
- Judge Timothy Kelly ruled that former Copyright Office director Shira Perlmutter would not suffer “irreparable harm” by remaining unemployed during her lawsuit
- Perlmutter was fired after Trump removed Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden, whose term was set to expire next year
- Democrats claim the firing undermines Congressional authority and may benefit tech companies like Elon Musk’s AI ventures
- The case raises significant separation of powers concerns as the Copyright Office serves as an advisor to Congress
Presidential Authority Challenged in Copyright Office Dispute
U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, appointed by former President Donald Trump in 2017, has ruled against former U.S. Copyright Office director Shira Perlmutter in her bid for emergency reinstatement. The decision marks a significant victory for the Trump administration in a case that has sparked debate about executive power and congressional authority. Perlmutter filed a lawsuit challenging her removal, claiming it was “unlawful and ineffective” after President Trump fired Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden and subsequently terminated Perlmutter’s position.
“In short, the President’s attempt to name Mr. Blanche as acting Librarian of Congress was unlawful and ineffective, and therefore Mr. Blanche cannot remove or replace Ms. Perlmutter”
The controversy began when President Trump removed Hayden via email, despite her term being set to expire next year. He appointed Todd Blanche, deputy attorney general, as Hayden’s temporary replacement. Perlmutter’s lawsuit contends that only the Librarian of Congress can appoint and remove the Register of Copyrights, and that the president lacks authority to appoint a temporary Librarian of Congress, rendering Blanche’s appointment – and his subsequent removal of Perlmutter – unlawful.
Claims of Political Motivation Behind Copyright Director’s Firing
Democratic critics have characterized the move as politically motivated. Rep. Joe Morelle of New York has been particularly vocal, suggesting the timing of Perlmutter’s removal was suspicious given recent Copyright Office positions on artificial intelligence. The firing came shortly after Perlmutter reportedly refused to support efforts to use copyrighted works to train AI models, which some claim would benefit tech entrepreneurs like Elon Musk, a prominent Trump supporter during the election.
“Donald Trump’s termination of Register of Copyrights, Shira Perlmutter, is a brazen, unprecedented power grab with no legal basis. It is surely no coincidence he acted less than a day after she refused to rubber-stamp Elon Musk’s efforts to mine troves of copyrighted works to train AI models”
The U.S. Copyright Office, which is responsible for registering copyright claims and advising Congress on copyright policies, had recently released a report addressing the use of copyrighted works in AI training. The report took a nuanced position, finding some AI training uses of copyrighted material to qualify as fair use, while indicating others exceed fair use boundaries. This position could potentially impact the trillion-dollar tech industry, particularly companies developing generative AI systems.
Constitutional Concerns and Separation of Powers
At the heart of Perlmutter’s lawsuit is a constitutional argument about separation of powers. Her legal team contends that the Copyright Office’s role as an advisor to Congress on copyright policy matters requires independence from executive branch interference. Perlmutter is seeking a court injunction to prevent Blanche from acting as Librarian of Congress and to affirm her position as head of the Copyright Office. The decision comes as President Trump has publicly committed to reducing the size of government and removing officials perceived as political opponents.
Judge Kelly’s ruling, which stated that Perlmutter would not suffer irreparable harm by remaining unemployed during the case proceedings, does not resolve the underlying constitutional questions raised by the lawsuit. These questions about presidential authority over agencies that serve Congress will likely continue to be litigated as the case proceeds through the courts. For now, the decision represents a significant procedural victory for the Trump administration in its efforts to reshape federal agencies.
Copyright 2025, DailyChive.com
