National Archives at College Park, MD, will become a restricted federal facility

I appreciate analogous cases are often not helpful, but in the UK some institutions like the national library of scotland are so-called "copyright libraries" and they have always restricted access to people who register and declare an interest grounded in research, or some gatekeeping around legitemate need otherwise. In many instances the documents held in these institutions are both rare, and contextually unique. Like paleological holotypes their role is different to objects on display in museums and collections.

I also believe in the general public's right to see and access things which relate to government. I'm just trying to point out that whilst this probably is reactive to current affairs (cost management? risks? FUD?) there are reasons and situations outside the USA where this is normal, and I do not mean "has been normalised to disadvantage you" -I just mean that identifying who you are and why you want to do something isn't that unusual, in archive access.

It's normal in the US too.. the Library of Congress has required it for certain collections for decades (that I know of):

https://www.loc.gov/research-centers/use-the-library/researc...

I was surprised when I saw this article and realized that until now anyone could just walk in off the street.

Why surprised? Didn't US taxpayers pay for the collection of all this information? Now only those with "legitimate" interest can get access? I would very much like to know what the reasoning behind this move is. Although I suspect that as per usual, a reason will not be forthcoming. But who knows, perhaps the Epstein files are now being kept there, LOL?

I dislike the fact that people are so hostile to the idea of public goods/services/places. It's really sad that free access to information is something anyone would find crazy or objectionable.

Overloading of the word "free" here. Contextually you might be meaning anonymous, unannounced, no justification required. Only anonimity would be harmed by requiring ID and in the case of at risk manuscripts, one of a kind, holograph works of significant value, I could see reasons to say "we have a booking system"

are you being reductionist on this, and "demanding" that unconstrained access exist as a norm?

I don't find identified purposeful access objectionable. I am concerned at the amount of degredation to works from constant public access to them: its a thing in european museums, cultural exhibits, lasceaux..