Victory for Right to Read: Federal Judge Eviscerates Florida Book Banning Law

From MSNBC:

A federal judge has closed the chapter on key parts of Florida’s censorious ban on school library books that conservatives deem “pornographic” and harmful to children.

Amid a broader assault on diversity in the state, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a law in 2023, known as House Bill 1069, that set up a process for parents to challenge books for removal from school libraries that they feel are unsuitable for young readers. The repressive law requires that schools remove books within five days of a parents’ complaint and make them unavailable while they’re reviewed. The process, broadly targeting books with “pornographic” content or that “describe sexual conduct,” has ensnared many titles by nonwhite and LGBTQ authors over purported obscenity.

Last year, multiple publishing companies, Florida parents and authors filed a lawsuit seeking to thwart the bill, naming as defendants various members of the state education board and school boards in Orange and Volusia counties. And the suit appears to have succeeded, in large part.

“By enacting HB 1069, the Florida legislature sought to prohibit material from entering or remaining in school libraries that is not obscene for minors,” District Court Judge Carlos Mendoza said in his ruling on Wednesday, which found the section that targets descriptions of sexual conduct to be unconstitutional.

He listed several examples:

The following books, among others, have been removed: The Color Purple, Half of a Yellow Sun, Cloud Atlas, The Splendid and the Vile, I am Not Your Perfect Mexican Daughter, The Freedom Writers Diary: How a Teacher and 150 Teens Used Writing to Change Themselves and the World Around Them, On the Road, Nineteen Minutes, Paper Towns, Looking for Alaska, How the García Girls Lost Their Accents, The Kite Runner, Slaughterhouse-Five, Shout, Last Night at the Telegraph Club, The Handmaid’s Tale, Native Son, Kaffir Boy: The True Story of a Black Youth’s Coming of Age in Apartheid South Africa, Water for Elephants, Beloved, Song of Solomon, The Bluest Eye, and Homegoing. None of these books are obscene.

Read the rest here. 

Oak Ridge Schools Bows to Book Banning Legislation by the Tennessee Taliban

Fifty years ago I was Director of Library Media Services at Oak Ridge High School. I could not have dreamed that 50 years later librarians would be scouring shelves to find school library books to purge in hopes of satisfying the illiterate legislative members of the TN Taliban who passed a criminally-vague and illegal statute last year, which aims to impose unconstitutional restrictions on intellectual freedom and the right to read. 

Here's a sample from over 300 axed titles :

Really!  Rodin, Hopper, Donatello???  Could this capitulation represent another case of unethical (un)professional conduct compounded by cowardice, or have professional standards sunk so low as to allow this kind brazen stupidity to prevail in the hiring of public school educators in a district that once celebrated intellectual freedom and artistic achievement?

The Oak Ridge Schools’ surrender to the political scourge that MAGA embodies could prove costly.  PEN America reported on June 10 that its lawsuit against Rutherford County Schools for banning hundreds of school library and public library books has led to the restoration of some of the titles removed earlier this year. The lawsuit, which is supported by TN ACLU, continues, however, until all the titles removed are restored to the shelves.

Open Letter to Knox County Schools Regarding Book Banning

Dear Ms. Searles:

I was shocked and saddened to see that Knox County Schools has published its list of 48 books that will be banned from school libraries in Knox County.  As a former librarian in the system (1982-1996), I believe this preemptive action by KCS represents a capitulation to the politically-backward and oppressive ideologues who must be rigorously opposed if the Right to Read, the Library Bill of Rights, and the freedom to think and intellectually and ethically grow are to be preserved in our public schools, which are our most vital laboratories of democracy.  

According to news stories, KCS librarians actively participated in this unethical capitulation and professional malfeasance by identifying books that they believe violate a nebulous and untested state statute that does not require the identification and expurgation of books by librarians. 

The American Library Association, the Association of School Librarians, and the Office of Intellectual Freedom all provide guidance for how to deal with censorious demands by astroturf groups like Moms for Liberty, who in fact represent the interests of anti-democratic influencers whose mission includes the destruction of democratic values in our communities and our country.

Librarians have an unambiguous professional responsibility and a moral duty to offer inclusive, quality collections and to refuse to engage in the expurgation of books. Librarians are obligated to protect the children and parents they serve and to resist efforts to violate the rights of their students (https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations):

Access to Library Resources and Services Regardless of Sex, Gender Identity, Gender Expression, or Sexual Orientation: The American Library Association stringently and unequivocally maintains that libraries and librarians have an obligation to resist efforts that systematically exclude materials dealing with any subject matter, including sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation. Amended 2020

Access to Resources and Services in the School Library: The school library plays a unique role in promoting intellectual freedom. It serves as a point of voluntary access to information and ideas and as a learning laboratory for students as they acquire critical thinking and problem-solving skills needed in a pluralistic society. Although the educational level and program of the school necessarily shapes the resources and services of a school library, the principles of the Library Bill of Rights apply equally to all libraries, including school libraries. Amended 2014

. . . . Expurgation of Library Materials: Expurgating library materials is a violation of the Library Bill of Rights. Expurgation as defined by this interpretation includes any deletion, excision, alteration, editing, or obliteration of any part(s) of books or other library resources by the library, its agent, or its parent institution (if any). Amended 2014

 See Library Bill of Rights below:

LIBRARY BILL OF RIGHTS 

The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services.

I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation.

II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.

III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.

IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas.

V. A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.

VI. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use.

VII. All people, regardless of origin, age, background, or views, possess a right to privacy and confidentiality in their library use. Libraries should advocate for, educate about, and protect people’s privacy, safeguarding all library use data, including personally identifiable information.

Adopted June 19, 1939, by the ALA Council; amended October 14, 1944; June 18, 1948; February 2, 1961; June 27, 1967; January 23, 1980; January 29, 2019.

Inclusion of “age” reaffirmed January 23, 1996. 

Although the Articles of the Library Bill of Rights are unambiguous statements of basic principles that should govern the service of all libraries, questions do arise concerning application of these principles to specific library practices. See the documents designated by the Intellectual Freedom Committee as Interpretations of the Library Bill of Rights.

Source: https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill

I believe that the Age-Appropriate Materials Act of 2022 and the subsequent passage of Public Chapter 782 do not, in fact, require the most recent actions taken by Knox County Schools.  Rather, the identification of the 48 titles in KCS libraries represents a dangerous form of “submission in advance,” whereby legitimate institutions preemptively take self-censoring actions that serve to encourage the ignorant audacity of book banners to demand more and more titles be removed from library shelves.

There are many Tennessee citizens who are very upset by this latest bow to authoritarian demands. KCS should be aware that lawsuits are not the sole prerogative of angry fascists.

Sincerely,
James Horn, PhD

ec: Dr. Jon Rysewyk, Superintendent

 

Beaufort, SC Offers the Nation a Lesson on Dealing with Moms for Liberty

Over 1,000 Books Banned During the Past Nine Months

From PEN America: 

Book bans in public schools have recurred throughout American history, and have long been an issue of concern to PEN America, as a literary and free expression advocacy organization. Over the past nine months, the scope of such censorship has expanded rapidly. In response, PEN America has collated an Index of School Book Bans, offering a snapshot of the trend. The Index documents decisions to ban books in school libraries and classrooms in the United States from July 1, 2021 to March 31, 2022.

 . . . .

It is not just the number of books removed that is disturbing, but the processes–or lack thereof–through which such removals are being carried out. Objections and challenges to books available in school are nothing new, and parents and citizens are within their rights to voice concerns about the appropriateness and suitability of particular books. In order to protect the First Amendment rights of students in public schools, though, procedural safeguards have been designed to help ensure that districts follow transparent, unbiased, established procedures, particularly when it comes to the review of library holdings. Of 1,586 bans listed in the Index, PEN America found that the vast majority (98%) have involved various departures from best practice guidelines outlined by the National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) and the American Library Association (ALA). Such guidelines have been designed to ensure rigorous standards and to avoid ad hoc, highly irregular acts that could run afoul of relevant legal doctrine. These guidelines include the filing of written, formal challenges by parents or local residents; the formation of review committees, generally comprised of librarians, teachers, administrators, and community members; and that books are to remain in circulation during the reconsideration process until a final decision is made. Challenges to library books and curricular and classroom materials are meant to happen first at the school-level, and then, if a decision is appealed, at the district-level. While the Supreme Court has recognized the “broad discretion” granted to local school boards in the “management of school affairs,” that discretion does not negate the responsibility of engaging in proper, considered processes concerning selections or removals. Rather, per Pico, school boards must exercise their discretion with respect to matters of education “​​in a manner that comports with the transcendent imperatives of the First Amendment.” News reports from school districts around the country indicate that this directive is being eschewed, as the responsibility of local school boards to employ appropriate  safeguards and best practices in these decisions is being widely abrogated.