Fired Copyright Chief Temporarily Regains Job During Appeal (1)

A split D.C. Circuit temporarily reinstated Shira Perlmutter as head of the Copyright Office while she appeals for a preliminary injunction in her suit alleging the Trump administration’s firing of her was an illegal power-grab.

Perlmutter demonstrated that her “unusual” and “likely unlawful” firing constituted a “genuinely extraordinary situation” that invoked separation of powers concerns, according to the opinion issued Wednesday by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The district court should have taken that into account in its analysis before concluding Perlmutter hadn’t demonstrated irreparable harm to herself, the majority said.

The opinion by Circuit Judge Florence Y. Pan swings the pendulum back in Perlmutter’s favor in a battle over the president’s authority over the Library of Congress, which manages the Copyright Office. Pan held the Library of Congress is statutorily designated as a legislative branch entity and noted it provides research and advice to Congress—including the pre-publication report on applying copyright law to AI that Perlmutter released the day before she was fired.

Circuit Judge Justin R. Walker dissented, and said he would’ve denied the injunction request. Walker said the Library’s copyright regulation function is “squarely a component of the executive branch,” citing D.C. Circuit precedent on a Copyright Office rulemaking appeal. Even if unlawful, the government faces greater risk of irreparable harm from being unable to operate than the removed officer does, he said.

Trump fired Perlmutter from her post on May 10, two days after dismissing her superior, Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden. Perlmutter’s May 22 lawsuit characterized her firing and the appointment as librarian of Todd Blanche, Trump’s former defense attorney and current Justice Department official, as a “sweeping” and illegal power-grab.

Perlmutter argued only a Senate-confirmed librarian has statutory authority to hire and fire the register of copyrights. But the administration argued the Federal Vacancies Reform Act and the US Constitution authorize Trump’s actions over a Library with substantial executive functions, led by a presidential appointee.

District Judge Timothy J. Kelly rejected Perlmutter’s theory that harm to the institution constituted harm to Perlmutter three separate times. He also suggested her case to be wrong on the merits given the Copyright Office’s executive functions.

But Pan said said the law makes clear that the Library of Congress is not an executive agency under the FVRA. The broader section of federal law doesn’t include it in a list of agencies and routinely refers to it as distinct from an “executive agency” or “independent establishment,” she said.

She said Kelly abused his discretion by not adequately considering that Perlmutter alleged she was promptly fired in retaliation for advice she provided Congress, referring to the AI and copyright law report.

“The Executive’s alleged blatant interference with the work of a Legislative Branch official, as she performs statutorily authorized duties to advise Congress, strikes us as a violation of the separation of powers that is significantly different in kind and in degree from the cases that have come before,” she said.

Pan agreed the US Supreme Court has deemed loss of government employment to be generally insufficient to show irreparable harm. But the high court’s opinion in Sampson v. Murray in 1974, as well as decisions in Trump v. Wilcox and Trump v. Boyle earlier this year, involved a probationary executive employee and two independent agencies firmly situated in the executive branch, she said.

Walker, a Trump appointee, said the register of copyrights exercises executive power by registering copyrights, overseeing the setting of compulsory royalty rates, and harnessing rulemaking authority.

The judges in the majority “repeat the mistake that Wilcox and Boyle twice corrected,” Walker said.

Pan faulted Kelly for “mechanically applying” Wilcox to a case with materially different circumstances. Trump’s interest in this case is also “far weaker” than in Boyle and Wilcox because Perlmutter, closely supervised by the Librarian, has less executive power, she said.

Circuit Judge J. Michelle Childs—like Pan, a Biden appointee—joined the opinion.

Democracy Forward Foundation and Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP represent Perlmutter. The Justice Department represents Trump and other defendants.

The case is Shira Perlmutter v. Todd Blanche, D.C. Cir., No. 25-05285, 9/10/25.