A victory in the freedom-to-read war

As an author, the news I’ve been watching most regularly from the U.S. is the coverage of book banning in schools and libraries. It may not seem to be the most important topic amid all the chaos around the world, but it’s a powerful symptom of the degradation of freedom, which often begins with trying to erase ideas.  

The state of Florida, whose 2023 House Bill 1069 resulted in their schools removing hundreds of books for fear of prosecution, has been especially contentious. This week a lot of people in the literary world are celebrating a significant win.

Under Bill 1069, school librarians were to remove materials that contained “sexual conduct”, regardless of their literary or artistic merit,  upon objection by some parents or residents of the county. Interestingly, there was a deadline – no more than 5 days after the objection – to remove the items for formal review, but none within which to hold the review. Nor did the bill require an item to be returned to shelves at any point after review. The Florida Department of Education training further wanted school librarians to “err on the side of caution”; if their libraries had materials with “sexual conduct,” they could be ‘punished’.

In August 2024, several individuals and organizations took a stand, filing a lawsuit against Florida public officials: two students and two parents; authors Julia Alvarez, Laurie Halse Anderson, John Green, Jodi Picoult, and Angie Thomas; the Authors Guild; and Penguin Random House along with five other publishers.

On August 14th this year, Judge Carlos Mendoza of the U.S. Middle District Court of Florida ruled in favour of the plaintiffs! In his 50-page judgement, he made some strong and interesting points:

That the Bill hadn’t supplied any specific parameters of what constituted “sexual conduct”, which then left the phrase open to interpretation based on the bias of the objector: “An ‘I know it when I see it’ test would unconstitutionally empower those who would limit speech to arbitrarily enforce the law. But the First Amendment empowers speakers instead.”That materials are to be judged by the Miller Test, the prevailing Supreme Court standard, which requires review of the materials as a whole, not just by a few passages or excerpts.As obscene material for minors is already prohibited under Florida law, there are not obscene materials for minors currently available in school and public libraries.

State officials had argued that they were empowered to make decisions about the materials in school collections because they fell under “government speech” and so weren’t subject to the First Amendment. Judge Mendoza stated that “A blanket content-based prohibition on materials, rather than one based on individualized curation, hardly expresses any intentional government message at all. Slapping the label of government speech on book removals only serves to stifle the disfavored viewpoints.”

My books are available in our local public libraries. They would likely be subject to attempted banning in Florida and other states (for DEI content), which actually makes me proud. It’s frightening when people and governments try to erase ideas and cultures that they disagree with, and while Florida will probably appeal the ruling, it’s good to see momentum building on the side of freedom for all.

Banned Books Week is coming up in October. Thousands of people will be watching avidly to see how it goes this year.