The E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse, where a lawsuit from ex-Register Shira Perlmutter is playing out. Photo Credit: Toohool
One month and change later, the legal battle for Copyright Office control is still in full swing. Now, a preliminary injunction push from fired Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter is taking center stage.
The sought injunction isn’t to be confused with Perlmutter’s prior stabs at a restraining order and summary judgement, which the presiding judge rejected. However, the reinstatement-minded plaintiff’s objective remains the same: The court should sign off on an injunction determining that the “purported removal of Ms. Perlmutter has no legal effect,” her counsel wrote earlier in June.
This injunction would enable Perlmutter to “resume her work as Register of Copyrights” and prevent the Trump administration “from encumbering her efforts to perform her duties,” per the text.
As many are already aware, the administration has from the outset defended Perlmutter’s removal (besides the appointment of an acting replacement) as entirely above board. And the clear-cut position is front and center in a newly submitted filing opposing an injunction.
Perlmutter, today’s filing reads, “has failed to demonstrate…that she will suffer irreparable injury absent a preliminary injunction” and “has no right to perpetual service as Register of Copyrights.”
Behind the straightforward view, the DOJ says the Library, as part of the Executive Branch, “is subject to presidential control, according to the strictures of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.”
Furthermore, in areas where the latter act “does not apply, the President’s constitutional power to supervise the Library is greater—not less,” the text indicates.
Following the stance to its logical conclusion, President Trump “lawfully removed Carla Hayden from her position as Librarian of Congress” in May, according to the document. Therefore, acting Librarian Todd Blanche “had clear authority to” remove and replace Perlmutter as Register, per the same source.
Meanwhile, in the absence of a Librarian, the defendants maintain that the president also possesses the authority to make changes at the Register level.
“In addition [to Blanche’s firing of Perlmutter], the President removed the Register directly—a removal that likewise is within his constitutional power when, as at that time, there was no Librarian,” the filing explains.
“The general rule is that the power to remove tracks the power to appoint; thus, the Librarian normally has the power to remove the Register. But if there is no Librarian and the President cannot designate an acting Librarian (as Plaintiff argues), the President’s removal authority extends to inferior officers like the Register,” the opposition drives home.
Regarding what comes next, Team Perlmutter’s retort is due back by July 1st. In the bigger picture – and as explored in detail by DMN Pro – the sweeping USCO changes are raising far-reaching questions about the direction of federal policy at the intersection of copyright and AI.
Recommended Comments
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.