A federal court has ruled against a group of NASA-affiliated scientists and a labor organization that sought to stop the closure of the Goddard Library in Greenbelt, Maryland. The court's decision, issued by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on April 21, 2026, denied the plaintiffs' request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, stating they did not demonstrate the necessary evidence of irreparable harm. This ruling affects NASA employees and researchers who rely on the library's resources.

The case, titled Williams v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Civil Action No. 2026-0564), arose after NASA announced in late 2025 that it would cease in-person services at the Goddard Library, the agency's largest research library. The plaintiffs argued that this decision violated the Federal Records Act (FRA) and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), claiming it threatened the preservation of important federal records and unique materials.

The plaintiffs in this case include two scientists affiliated with NASA and the Goddard Engineers, Scientists and Technicians Association, a labor organization representing federal employees at the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). They filed their lawsuit after NASA decided to close the library and take the NASA Space Science Data Coordinated Archive offline, which they argued would lead to the permanent loss of valuable records. The plaintiffs sought urgent court intervention, warning of an "imminent threat" to the preservation of these materials.

In the court's opinion, Judge Cooper outlined the legal background surrounding the case, emphasizing the importance of the FRA, which governs the management and disposal of federal records. The FRA mandates that federal agencies must preserve records that document their functions, policies, and decisions. The plaintiffs contended that NASA's actions violated this law by failing to properly manage the records housed in the Goddard Library.

Judge Cooper stated, "The court recognizes the significance of the materials housed at the Goddard Library but finds that the plaintiffs have not sufficiently demonstrated that irreparable harm will occur due to the library's closure." He highlighted that the plaintiffs focused primarily on the potential loss of records rather than the closure of the physical library itself.

The court's ruling emphasized that the plaintiffs did not meet the burden of proof required for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction. To succeed in such requests, plaintiffs must show they are likely to succeed on the merits of their case, that they will suffer irreparable harm without the injunction, and that the public interest would be served by granting the injunction.

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims, particularly regarding the irreparable harm that would result from the closure of the library. Judge Cooper noted that the plaintiffs' arguments primarily centered around the potential loss of materials rather than the closure itself, which weakened their case.

The impact of this ruling is significant for NASA employees and researchers who rely on the Goddard Library's resources. The decision not only allows NASA to proceed with its plans to close the library but also raises concerns about the future of federal record preservation. The court's ruling could set a precedent for how federal agencies manage their records and the extent to which employees can challenge such decisions.

Moving forward, the plaintiffs may consider appealing the court's decision, although details regarding any potential appeal were not immediately available. Additionally, a related lawsuit challenging an executive order affecting labor relations at NASA is pending in the same court, which may have implications for the ongoing dispute over the library's closure.