Children's Books discussion
Banned Books: discussions, lists
>
Discussion of censorship, equity, and other concerns.
Woah this is Boston. I didn't know they had removed flags. Brookline Public Library (MA) will be reinstating both Pride and Black Lives Matter flags in their building.
https://brookline.news/after-debate-l...
After a tense debate and a public comment campaign, Brookline’s Board of Library Trustees authorized the town’s libraries to display Pride and Black Lives Matter flags in June.
Pride, Black Lives Matter, and other flags — Stop Asian Hate flags and flags condemning antisemitism — were displayed outside the library’s three branches for years until May 2023, when former Library Director Amanda Hirst implemented a facility and grounds policy that led to their removal.
The policy aimed to reserve the library’s display space for materials explicitly related to library programs and required signs, flags and other displays to be approved by a vote of the Board of Library Trustees. In Brookline, 12 elected trustees are responsible for hiring and managing the library director and overseeing the library’s budget, services and policies.
The facility and grounds policy also aimed to maintain the library’s role as a “neutral” organization without political or religious affiliations.
On May 13, about a dozen library employees and community members made public comments at a board meeting voicing their desire to display the Pride and Black Lives Matter flags again.
Jackson Mathews, a reference librarian at the Brookline Village branch of the Public Library of Brookline, recounted a time several years ago when Pride flags outside the library were vandalized.
“I took a very long time making sure those flags were back up and in good shape, and I would do that again and again as necessary,” Mathews said. “It’s very important to have the flags out there to show support for our community.”
While several library trustees expressed solidarity with those who spoke at the meeting, some raised concerns about the legal implications of flying flags.
Carol Lohe a trustee, said displaying some flags might make it difficult for the library not to display others if requested.
“One of the reasons not to put a Pride flag up is because if next month, a neo-Nazi group wanted to put a flag up, we would have a hard time saying no,” Lohe said at the meeting on May 13. “If we said no, they’d sue the pants off us, and they’d win, both because of our policy and because that’s what inclusion is about.”
Others echoed Lohe’s hesitancy. One trustee, Jon Margolis, referenced a 2022 Supreme Court ruling against the city of Boston, which decided that the city must allow a Christian group to fly its flag outside of City Hall.
“The Supreme Court said that’s viewpoint discrimination,” Margolis said at the meeting. “You can’t discriminate upon viewpoints.”
Other trustees pushed back, saying the facility and grounds policy permits the display of materials relevant to programming, and Pride and Black Lives Matter flags would be related to the library’s upcoming programming for Pride month and Juneteenth.
“From the beginning, it was supposed to be that the flags were going to go back up when it was appropriate for programming,” said Trustee Michael Burstein.
After further discussion and input from his colleagues, Burstein made a motion for the library to display Pride and Black Lives Matter flags outside all three library branches during June, alongside messaging about relevant library programming. The motion passed with 10 yes votes and two abstentions from Lohe and Margolis.
For Mac Miller, a library assistant in the collection services department at the Brookline Village library branch, showing allyship for the queer community is an important display of solidarity during a time when the national political climate is not as accepting.
“Neutral institution or not, it would be a message of hope to people such as myself to see a local library flying a Pride flag during Pride month,” Miller said in a public comment at the meeting.
-------------------------------------------------------------
In related news, Providence, Rhode Island mayor issued an announcement banning flags other than state and U.S. flags except those approved. He recently converted to Judaism and objected to a Palestinian flag city councilors flew over city hall. This doesn't yet apply to other city buildings. The good news is, he's gay so the Pride flag can fly proudly.
https://www.wpri.com/news/local-news/...
FloridaHillsborough County schools face state pressure over books under review
https://www.fox13news.com/news/hillsb...
Hillsborough County School Superintendent Van Ayres is scheduled to meet with Florida Education Commissioner Manny Diaz in Miami on Wednesday.
The meeting follows a letter from Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier demanding the "immediate removal" of what he called "patently p---graphic" books from school libraries.
In response, the school district has launched a new review of potentially hundreds of titles, a process that could cost up to $500,000, according to board members.
No official vote was taken at Monday night’s school board meeting, but emotions ran high as members and parents debated the direction of the district’s approach to book removals.
Parents in favor of the ban said the action by state officials have been a long time coming.
...
Critics of the book bans argue that many of the targeted titles are not only appropriate but also vital for students from marginalized communities.
"I feel like they’re highlighting the worst-case scenarios," said Hillsborough parent Gianny Hunt. "Maybe that is reality for some kids. Maybe it speaks to a child who’s experiencing something like that."
Hunt added that some of the books flagged for removal include stories about race, immigration, and military service — narratives she says resonate with many students.
More in Hillsborough:
Under fire from state, Hillsborough’s Ayres pledges to pull more books
Education officials mused about firing librarians or exploring criminal charges if the county doesn’t remove more materials
https://www.tampabay.com/news/educati...
Hillsborough County schools Superintendent Van Ayres pledged to remove more books from district shelves during a heated state Board of Education meeting on Wednesday, as board members suggested firing all county media specialists or exploring criminal charges as possible alternatives.
The meeting in Miami followed letters from Education Commissioner Manny Diaz and Attorney General James Uthmeier sharing concerns about the content of six books including “p-----graphic materials” in school shelves. Ayres told the state board he would immediately order the removal of another 57 titles identified by the state as objectionable.
“I expect and hope that these books will be removed in the next two weeks,” board Chairperson Ben Gibson told Ayres. “If they’re not removed, then I’m going to ask the department and I’ll ask the attorney general to use every tool within their disposal to make sure that pornographic materials are not in our schools.”
Ayres and the district’s attorney, James Porter, said the district had already permanently removed the six books listed by Diaz and Uthmeier, and had pulled for review 600 additional books that had been challenged in any other Florida county.
That decision put Ayres at odds with members his of own school board, who said that while they supported the idea of removing inappropriate materials, they felt they should have been consulted. Board members also said his plan to offer a $1,500 stipend to eligible employees to help review books could cost the district more than the $345,000 he estimated.
The state board also did not appear to be satisfied with Ayres’ move. They pressed for the immediate removal of a subset list of 57 titles they deemed patently p---graphic, which includes “All Boys Aren’t Blue” by George Johnson and “A Stolen Life: A Memoir” by Jaycee Lee Dugard.
“These are nasty, disgusting books that have no place in a school in Florida or even California,” board Vice Chairperson Richard Petty said. “Please help me understand what your review process is. ... ‘Process’ sounds complicated. ‘Process’ sounds like it takes time. ‘Process’ sounds like there’s some ambiguity to the outcome.”
Ayres said there is no process needed “if the material is inappropriate for our students.”
In 2022, the state passed a law requiring trained media specialists to approve all materials in school libraries, and in 2023, they passed a law expanding the definition of unsuitable material. This year, a proposal to further define what is unsuitable failed to become law.
But at Wednesday’s meeting, the state board questioned the existing processes in Hillsborough County.
Currently, if a parent has a concern with a book that a media specialist has allowed into a school’s collections, they can raise it to a school-level committee. The committee would then read the book in its entirety and weigh the objectionable passages against the whole to determine if it should meet the criteria for selection, calling on outside professionals when necessary.
If a book is deemed inappropriate, it can either be referred to a different age level or removed from that school and elevated to be considered for district-wide removal. The district said more than 389,000 books out of more than 2 million had been removed as a result of these processes, but no concerns had previously come up about the specific titles the state identified.
Still, the board urged Ayres to go further.
“Have you considered firing all your media specialists and starting from scratch with women and men who can read?” board member Grazie Pozo Christie asked. “These people that you trust to review these materials are abusing the children of your county. They’re child abusers.”
The words they had allowed were “too dirty and gross” for her to look at, she said.
Ayres said he did trust the media specialists and that 95 percent were certified.
Petty then asked Ayres to read out loud an excerpt from the memoir by Dugard, who was a kidnapping victim at age 11.
“I’m not going to — this material is not appropriate,” Ayres said. “I’m not going to read that out loud, and that’s why it was made unavailable for our students.”
“But you trust your media specialists, who obviously read this?” Petty followed. “I think this is a moment where we need to see some courage from you to say this is inappropriate. I don’t care what the rules say. I don’t care what the current process is. This garbage should not be in schools in Hillsborough County schools, because it serves absolutely no educational purpose.”
Board member Daniel Foganholi said he believed accountability should fall on more than just Ayres.
“You have activist board members that put superintendents in a tough place, force them to do things, keep things in their libraries,” he said. “What are we going to do to hold them accountable?”
Diaz pointed to the “teeth in the law” and said the attorney general’s office could explore repercussions for anyone who tries to prevent the removal of controversial books — including board members.
“I want to provide caution to those individuals that are either on a board and trying to put pressure on a superintendent, or those individuals that are directly placing these items in the library: they could face penalty under law and prosecution,” Diaz said.
For now good news in WisconsinA popular and well-respected librarian for the Bad River Public Tribal Library in northern Wisconsin, who was laid off by the Trump administration in April, has recently returned to work.”
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/l...
Around 10:00 p.m. on April 8, Jennifer Maveety received an email saying the Institute of Museum and Library Services was ending the federal grant that funded her role as library coordinator.
The letter further explained that the museum and library agency was repurposing itself to align with President Trump’s agenda and following his March 14 executive order to eliminate all non-statutorily required activities and functions.
Maveety was hired as library coordinator in December 2022 to help the tribe reopen its library, closed since 2016. She helped redesign and rebuild it in a new space, completing the project in just six months − half the time her supervisor, tribal education director Stephanie Julian, had expected. The library opened in June 2023, and Maveety’s welcoming presence quickly drew in community members, confirming how much the reservation needed the space.
Maveety’s termination set off a firestorm of dozens of social media posts and comments, supporting her and criticizing the president’s agenda. But on May 21, she received another email stating that she would be reinstated in compliance with a May 13 federal court injunction. Maveety returned to work on May 27.
...
The Bad River Public Tribal Library contains more than 5,000 books, circulates more than 20,000 items per year and serves more than 1,000 residents. Maveety is its sole staff member.
Maveety creates and runs summer reading programs for children and book clubs for adults, which have become especially popular, and helps people write resumes and cover letters.
Federal funding allows the library to purchase books by Indigenous authors for all ages and give them to readers for the book club, Maveety said. Some tribal members have even told her they’ve never read a book by an Indigenous author before the book club.
The tribal library contains hard-to-find volumes about local Indigenous history used by academic researchers around the state. While some books by Indigenous authors have been banned in other parts of the country, they remain available in the state's tribal libraries.
...
This Wisconsin library remains a source of Native truth as libraries across the country ban books by Indigenous authors
Maveety said the library is one of the last places people can go to free of charge that provides useful, accurate information in this age of misinformation and censorship.
However, the wave of book bans and anti-DEI efforts could affect students from the non-tribal Ashland School District from learning about Indigenous history and culture, she said. Currently, those students learn about Ojibwe activities, such as those involving canoes, wild ricing and maple tapping. Maveety hopes the state’s Act 31, which mandates public schools teach about Indigenous peoples, can help protect that learning in Wisconsin.
And even though she's been reinstated, she worries about the future of federal funding with the latest appeal to the court’s decision.
“Anything that’s federally funded feels very precarious," she said.
ArkansasThe former Crawford County Public Library director has sued the library for defamation and breach of contract.
https://arkansasadvocate.com/2025/06/...
Deidre Grzymala asserts she was pressured into segregating LGBTQ+ children’s books and later falsely held responsible for a federal lawsuit over the move
A former West Arkansas public library director sued Crawford County and a member of the library’s board of trustees Friday, alleging defamation and breach of contract in a years-long squabble over the availability and placement of certain books on library shelves.
Deidre Grzymala states in her legal complaint that library board member Tammara Hamby defamed her in violation of an agreement between Grzymala and the county upon her resignation as Crawford County Library System director in February 2023. The agreement said Grzymala and the county would refrain from “criticizing, denigrating or disparaging each other.”
At an April 18 library board meeting, Hamby claimed Grzymala was responsible for a First Amendment lawsuit against the county, the library board and others over the library’s segregation of children’s books with LGBTQ+ themes into “social sections.” Three parents sued over the segregation in May 2023, and a federal judge ruled in their favor in September 2024.
The Crawford County Quorum Court voted unanimously at a special meeting in April to accept the library board’s offer to pay nearly $113,000 in legal fees, ending months of dispute over who would foot the bill for losing the case.
Hamby was among the board members to support the payment and previously supported the segregation of LGBTQ+ children’s books. The county quorum court appointed her to the library board in early 2023, replacing one of three members that resigned en masse after the creation of the “social sections.”
Hamby said April 18 that Grzymala “lied to” her and “caused the lawsuit.” These “defamatory statements… were communicated to thousands of Arkansas citizens” via the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s River Valley bureau, Grzymala’s complaint states.
In addition to Hamby and Crawford County, the lawsuit lists “John Doe 1-5” as defendants. Grzymala’s attorney, Christopher Hooks, signed an affidavit attached to the complaint, stating that all the relevant defendants in the case are as yet unknown and will be named in the case upon Hooks learning their identities.
Hooks previously alleged a violation of Crawford County’s “separation agreement” with Grzymala in an April 23 letter to the county seeking $100,000 in damages over Hamby’s remarks.
Grzymala’s lawsuit seeks punitive damages, alleging she has faced “damage to [her] reputation as a librarian/library director, damages to reputation in the community, loss of wages, loss of earning capacity and business opportunity, incidental expenses, mental anguish, [and] extreme emotional distress.”
The complaint requests a jury trial in the circuit court of Washington County, where Grzymala now lives.
...
Huntington Beach, California where the censors are throwing a hissy fit and playing hardball to get what they want.HB City Council Might Promise to Not Ban Books Ahead of Library Special Election
https://voiceofoc.org/2025/06/hb-city...
Huntington Beach City Council members are slated to discuss prohibiting book bans at their local library amid concerns over what books will be available to check out.
The concerns come in the final days of voters casting their ballots for Measures A and B, which if approved would dismantle the library’s restricted section and proposals for a book review committee, along with preventing the city from outsourcing the library’s operations.
The last day to vote is June 10, and in person voting centers open on Saturday.
City council members have argued that there are a number of s--ually explicit books available to children at the public library, encouraging voters to vote no on both A and B to allow their proposals to move forward.
Proponents of the measures argue that both the restricted section and the proposed book review committee are a thinly disguised effort to ban books or stop them from getting into the library in the first place, a claim the council has repeatedly denied publicly.
Now, city council members are proposing an official resolution promising not to sell the library and to not ban books.
“City Council does not support banning books and books shall not be banned from the (library),” reads the memo signed by Councilmen Chad Williams, Don Kennedy and Butch Twining.
Williams is running the No on A&B campaign, and Twining donated over $8,000 to the campaign’s funds.
For weeks, many residents have also shown up to protest or support a series of ads calling on voters to “Protect Our Kids from Pr0n – No on A&B,” that were greenlit by Williams.
The debate over the library has also become one of the most expensive special elections in the city’s history, with over $300,000 raised between both sides combined.
City Council members also just unanimously voted to call for an investigation of the Friends of the Library nonprofit, which helps fundraise for the library and donated at least $47,000 to the Yes on A&B campaign.
Council members also issued similar calls against the Ocean View School District School Board for voting to support the measures and directing the superintendent to distribute the resolution of support to district parents.
A republican lawmaker in Connecticut chose to read passages from Me and Earl and The Dying Girl on the floor during budget debates to “make a point” about “inappropriate” books in schools. Graphic words on female bodies in CT House raises objections. Lawmaker: it came from school library
https://www.courant.com/2025/06/03/gr...
State legislators were stunned during a late-night budget debate when a veteran Republican lawmaker stood up and read graphic references to the female anatomy from a school library book.
The exchange late Monday night became the talk of the state Capitol on Tuesday as some lawmakers defended the exchange and others dismissed it as unnecessary.
Rep. Anne Dauphinais of Danielson, who is among the legislature’s most conservative Republicans, said she was concerned that portions of the “library bill” had been inserted into the 693-page state budget that lawmakers were debating at about 11 p.m. Monday. Dauphinais alleged the graphic language was available to state students and was giving examples from various books.
....”
The deputy House Speaker who was overseeing the debate immediately banged the gavel and temporarily stopped Dauphinais from speaking.
“Madam, I would ask that we not try to use that type of language in the chamber and try to keep some decorum,” said Rep. Juan Candelaria, a New Haven Democrat. “I know you were talking of specific books, but if we could refrain from those type of words because there are also people and children watching this debate. … I would ask kindly if we could just use either a different word or something different just out of respect for others that might get offended. Thank you.”
Dauphinais responded, “Mr. Speaker, I stand here to share with the chamber the books that are available in our public school libraries to the very children you’re telling me that this language isn’t appropriate in this chamber. This is in elementary school libraries, approved by the very individuals that are supposed to be the experts.”
The exchange set off a firestorm of debate that spilled into the next day. Some said the issue was overblown and a distraction, while others said that young students are exposed to far more graphic and pornographic material available on their cell phones on a daily basis than in the seldom-used libraries.
The bill was designed to ensure that all libraries have written policies on how to purchase books and how to handle challenges to the content of the books, officials said. Some schools currently have no policies and in other cases, the policies are 30 years old and had not been revisited.
The book cited by Dauphinais, lawmakers said, is available in an elementary school in Waterbury, along with middle and high schools in Stamford, along with Ellington, New Britain, and Milford, among others. Other books are available at John F. Kennedy High School in Waterbury, E.O. Smith High School in Storrs, and East Hartford High School.
House Speaker Matt Ritter of Hartford, who has two children, said the issue backfired on Republicans.
“For the socially moderate, fiscally conservative Republicans that still exist in Connecticut, to know that your entire budget debate comes down to somebody who wants to make this a cultural issue and use words like that, would probably anger me,” Ritter told reporters Tuesday. “Do I think that most Connecticut families are running around, scared of their libraries or librarians? No. … I don’t think the average 14-year-old kid is going to the library and running into trouble and seeing things that maybe he or she should not see.”
Ritter added, “So I feel bad for the fiscally moderate Republicans because it really hurts their brand. For us, it was sort of just tomfoolery and riffraff. As I said to Juan [Candelaria], let her do it. I don’t care. Because they want the response — like children. … You hurt your own party. You disrespect your own colleagues when you do that. You don’t disrespect the Democrats.”
But House Republican leader Vincent Candelora of North Branford strongly defended Dauphinais, saying she had the right to speak on a controversial issue. He added that an important public policy should not have been jammed into the budget document at the last minute for a late-night debate in a 693-page bill with numerous other issues.
“What was disrespectful was to have an implementer — a budget bill — that had a lot of policies that went well beyond the budget, and one of them being how libraries are going to be governed now,” Candelora told reporters Tuesday. “Librarians shouldn’t have carte blanche on what ends up in the library. … There needs to be age-appropriate materials in appropriate sections.” [Yes there already are and no they don't choose carte blanche... there's a process! Just ask!]
Candelora added, “When government is providing services to the general public, we want to make sure that there are certain standards that are put in place. So I object to my tax dollars being put in a library that might have p---graphic material for children. I would just like assurances that there are age-appropriate sections in libraries. And Democrats, unfortunately, all along in this session have rejected those amendments to provide those protections. … You saw us push back. It certainly was shocking for people to hear on the House floor, but that is the reality of what is in the libraries around the state of Connecticut.”
Concerning the subsequent firestorm following the reading of the books, Candelora said, “If an elected official has the courage to stand at a podium and say what she said and takes ownership of it, I have no problem with it. … I don’t think she was trying to be gratuitous. I think she was trying to make a point, and she was quite effective in making that point because we are talking about it today.”
House majority leader Jason Rojas, an East Hartford Democrat, said that the deputy speaker “handled it as professionally as could be handled in that situation” and limited the use of harsh language in the debate.
“As someone who has spent a lot of time in libraries and has three children that spend time in libraries, I’m guessing those books are out there,” Rojas said. “I’ve just never had that experience myself. In 17 years as a legislator, I have never had an email from a constituent on an inappropriate book in a library or in a school. … I’m guessing these books are out there, but I don’t know, as the Speaker noted earlier, that this is what’s top of mind for parents, for families, and for children.”
The issue came up in sections 345 to 347 of the massive budget document, which is House bill 7287. The so-called “library bill” had originally been a standalone issue, but it was then inserted into the much-larger budget bill in an effort to ensure its passage before the regular legislative session adjourns at midnight Wednesday.
On the House floor, Democratic state Rep. Larry Butler of Waterbury said he was offended when Dauphinais had read the graphic details in relation to “the library bill,” which was Senate Bill 1271.
“To repeat the vulgarity that is in them, on this floor, is something that we should never hear,” Butler said. “I am so taken aback. So offended. I wasn’t raised like that and certainly didn’t come here to hear that.”
Rep. Toni Walker, a longtime New Haven Democrat, said she was concerned about the decorum in the chamber on Monday night, adding that young people are often listening to the debates.
A nonpartisan analysis states, “The bill requires the policies to, among other things, ensure that library materials are evaluated and made accessible to conform with applicable state non-discrimination laws, which generally prohibit discrimination based on race, color, sex, gender identity, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability.”
The analysis says the bill “also specifically requires the policies adopted under the bill to, among other things: recognize that library and other materials should represent a wide range of varied and diverging viewpoints … and prohibit removing library material on the sole basis that someone finds the book offensive or because of the origin, background, or viewpoints of the material’s creator or as expressed in the material.”
In addition, “the school policy must address student access to age-appropriate and grade-level-appropriate material and require a superintendent who receives a reconsideration request to appoint a library material review committee to consider it. Lastly, the bill also grants employees immunity from liability when they perform their duties under the bill and allows them to bring legal action for defamation or damage to their reputations related to the same.”
Ellen Paul, the executive director of the Connecticut Library Consortium that serves more than 1,000 libraries, said, “This bill is enormously important to public and school libraries across the state, and I am so pleased that it passed the House.”
She noted that Rojas “spoke accurately” of relatively few challenges on the issue, adding that there have been controversies in Suffield, Colchester, Fairfield, Newtown, and Guilford.
“I think this is a really common-sense bill,” Paul told The Courant on Tuesday.
The measure was included in the budget bill that was sent to the state Senate, which was debating the matter Tuesday night. At about 6:40 p.m., the issue was mentioned briefly in the Senate by Republican Sen. Rob Sampson, who said it had nothing to do with banning books. He spoke for only about two minutes before moving onto another area of the budget, saying that other colleagues would address the issue later.
Sen. Henri Martin, a Bristol Republican, said shortly before 10 p.m. that he would not read any excerpts from books that he described as “very vulgar and obscene” in the libraries. He also questioned why the bill grants civil and criminal immunity to the librarians to protect their decisions from being challenged.
...
Martin offered an amendment to eliminate immunity from the bill, but it was rejected, 25-11, on strict party lines. He also offered an amendment that the bill would not apply to non-public schools, but Sen. Cathy Osten of Sprague said the amendment was not necessary because the legislation did not apply to non-public schools. The amendment failed on strict party lines after 10:30 p.m. Tuesday.
“Parents have little say in the books or materials the library offers,” Martin told his colleagues. “I don’t believe it’s too complicated for people to understand this.”
Mod
I want to watch this, and I bet that homophobes' heads are exploding.
Manybooks wrote: "https://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/the-...I want to watch this, and I bet that ho..."
Oh yes!
https://sites.tufts.edu/museumstudent...
Two of them, not the daddies from And Tango Makes Three- two DIFFERENT male Humbolt penguins who are not coupled with each other yet but have with other males - have just arrived at the Roger Williams Park Zoo in Providence. The zookeeper said penguins are naturally clumsy animals and not great at hatching eggs. They often take away the egg from the clumsiest penguins and replace it with a surrogate. The egg then goes to less clumsy foster parents and sometimes, more often than you think, those foster parents are two males. Like I said before, they're a vulnerable species and the zoo's breeding program is trying to keep that species alive. Human behavior puts them at risk.
Humboldt penguins can breed at any time of the year and breed up to twice a year. Females lay one or two eggs, which are incubated for about 40 days by both parents.
https://www.providencejournal.com/sto...
GeorgiaParents share concerns about new Columbia County library rules
Columbia County parents say they want the library board to backtrack on its policy to make certain books accessible for kids of certain ages.
They're forcing 8 year olds to read ONLY picture books and 14 year olds to read "uplifiting" Middle Grades books. No nudity or profanity in these books including puberty books or even books about bodies for toddlers.
https://www.wrdw.com/video/2025/06/04...
Mod
I want to watch this,..."
Sigh, human behaviour is putting everything at risk. I sure hope that same sex animals at zoos and on farms will not be facing threats.
SC banned more school books than any other state. Can any be reinstated?not unless someone sues. There are no procedures at the state level to bring back a book that's already been reviewed and removed by the state board of education.
Read more at: https://www.islandpacket.com/news/loc...
County resident and parent Elizabeth “Ivie” Szalai played a key role in helping the state lead the nation in public school book bans this year, requesting the removal of over half of the 22 books that were ultimately pulled or restricted. Years earlier — before Regulation 43-170 existed — she asked the Beaufort County School District to remove 97 books. At that time, five were axed.
But opposition to the bans also emerged from Beaufort County with organizations like Families Against Book Bans and Diversity Awareness Youth Literacy Organization, the former originating from the first fight against the removal of 97 books at the district level.
The debate escalated in April when the state Department of Education board paused a vote to remove 10 books statewide, opting to review the challenges and revisit the issue in May. That decision marked a win for those opposing the bans. But at the May meeting, when the board voted to remove the books, a new question emerged: what would it take to not just stop future bans — but to “unban” a book?
Can a book be ‘unbanned’ ?
Can pulled books be reinstated? Put simply, not unless someone sues.
There are no procedures at the state level to bring back a book that’s already been reviewed and removed by the state board of education.
“The State Board may revisit past decisions for good reason, such as a change in law or fact,” wrote Jason Raven, the state department of education spokesperson. “However, the State Board cannot reverse a decision that would result in the Board violating the regulation, which has the force and effect of law.”
Christian Hanley, a board member and chair of the Instructional Materials Review Committee, agreed, saying there’s no process for reinstating books removed under Regulation 43-170. However, amending the regulation is possible, he said, but it would require a lengthy and complex process — including drafting new language, public comment periods, multiple board readings and legislative approval.
When asked whether discussions had started about creating a reinstatement process, Hanley said, “That’s not been talked about.”
Hanley, who has supported book removals, said he’s read research suggesting that exposure to s--ually explicit content can harm young people and increase the risk of problematic s--ual behavior.
Most of the state board appears to agree. In the May vote to remove 10 more books, only two of the 15 board members opposed the action.
Although the state Department of Education doesn’t have a formal process for reinstating previously removed books, existing regulations can be amended.
At the June 3 board meeting, Tenley Middleton, president-elect of the South Carolina Association of School Librarians, and Lacey Lane, a teacher and parent of two school-aged children, proposed several changes to Regulation 43-170. Their recommendations included:
Require the committee to read all challenged books in full before making decisions
Evaluate books for educational and artistic value
Allow exceptions for:
Include a diverse, locally representative review committee (including five parents, an administrator, a librarian, three teachers and two high school students)
Permit districts to maintain stronger existing policies
Keep books accessible during the review process
State lawmakers are also weighing in. Rep. Heather Bauer, D-Richland, and South Carolina House Democrats recently announced support for a bill designed to push back against book bans and protect school librarians’ professional autonomy.
If passed, the legislation could create a clearer path to prevent — and possibly reverse — book bans. But how far the bill would go in restoring previously banned books is unclear, and its chances of advancing in the current General Assembly remain uncertain.
Some legal experts have questioned whether bans like those under Regulation 43-170 are constitutional. The 1982 Supreme Court case Pico v. Island Trees School District ruled that school boards can’t remove books simply because they dislike the ideas in them.
...
At the June 3 board meeting, members began a mandatory review of state regulations, as required every five years. Changes in law require updates to board rules, which must go through public notice and two formal readings, according to Robert Cathcart, the department’s policy and legal advisor.
Recommendations included amending seven regulations and eliminating or consolidating six others — a step toward streamlining state policy.
“As a reminder in the hierarchy, you have constitutional law, and then you have regulations,” Cathcart said. “The law changes — we also have to change our regulations.”
For now, once a book is banned under Regulation 43-170, it stays off public school shelves. There’s no current path for reversal outside of changing the law itself, which is something those opposing book bans can pursue legally in an appeals process.
As of June 4, no books are under review at the state level. The state Department of Education will also not hold a meeting in July.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/sc-banned-...
TexasMost parents in Katy Independent School District don’t agree with rampant book bans and policies directly targeting trans students.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/neig...
Michigan
A look at the battle over labeling, restricting, and removing books in Hartland Cromaine District Library
https://www.iosconews.com/news/state/...
Jay Kaplan, a long-time staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan staff specializing in LGBTQ+ rights, said in an interview with Michigan Advance that right-wing culture warriors were employing this new tactic because they were losing the overall campaign on outright book bans.
“They’re losing in terms of the public opinion, [because] a vast majority of people disfavor this type of thing,” Kaplan said. “And so they feel, ‘We’ll just try to move it to another place in the library. We’ll try to put a label on it. We’ll try and discourage people from being able to take them out.’”
But federal courts have looked at the issue, and they have found, Kaplan said, that even when a community is not just removing the book entirely from the library, the act of putting a burden on the First Amendment right to receive information based on content amounted to the same.
“Particularly if what’s motivating you to want to limit them is your disapproval of the subject matter of the book, or some of the contents of the book,” he said. “That also violates the First Amendment.”
For the Hartland Cromaine District Library in Livingston County, the conversation on labeling books started in 2022. Over time and with the election of new library Board of Trustees members, the conversation became much more pointed.
Much of that had to do with the election of Bill Bolin, the pastor of the FloodGate Church in Brighton, and his elevation to the president of the Cromaine District Library board in January. Bolin and his church have been written about by various publications, including The Atlantic’s Tim Alberta, detailing Bolin’s mixture of right-wing conspiratorial politics and Christianity. Bolin also features throughout Alberta’s 2023 book, “The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory: American Evangelicals in an Age of Extremism.”
Some board members questioned Bolin’s experience and qualifications for running the library board in a breezy rural district just before he was selected as its leader in January. But the board voted 5-2 to install him at the top.
In February, Bolin, as the congregants of the FloodGate Church know him to do, began to speak out of order to introduce himself and detail exactly why it was that he sought the library board position and its leadership post, according to the approved minutes of the board’s February 20 meeting.
...
Bolin said that the board would then discuss controversial items on the agenda, including the removal of June LGBTQ+ Pride displays, labeling certain books that may be deemed controversial, moving books to an age restricted area, providing supervision in the teen area to monitor “behavior” and returning the Pledge of Allegiance to monthly meetings.
Bolin then read from Michigan law regarding the displaying or disseminating of s----ally explicit materials to minors, followed by a recitation of a potential warning label he had created warning adults of the dangers of providing such material to children.
But Bolin wasn’t talking about dirty magazines in a seedy retail store: he was talking about books within the community’s public library.
....
[Blah blah cue the usual rhetoric about protecting children]
Bolin added that a list of books that could be recommended for labeling was being compiled with at least 80 titles, minimum, to be presented to the librarian “for labeling and movement into an age-appropriate section of the library.”
Members of the community present at the February 20 meeting noted that the Top 10 challenged books in that list had LGBTQ+ characters or themes. Some questioned if the board had the legal authority to deem what was and wasn’t s--ual in nature about these books, while others praised the move.
Among the latter was Livingston County Commissioner Wes Nakagiri, one of the architects of the conservative Tea Party movement in Michigan, which undoubtedly built the framework of the America First and MAGA movement that propelled President Donald Trump to power in 2016 and again in 2024.
A day before that meeting, on February 19, the board sought and received a legal opinion from its corporate counsel at the Foster Swift law firm on whether it could move forward with restricting access to books or otherwise discouraging minor patrons from getting to them.
In a memo provided to Michigan Advance, the law firm expressed concern that the library would be on shaky constitutional ground if it moved forward with a policy that would move books to an adult-only section, placing them behind glass, creating a separate section for controversial books or placing on them labels identifying them as obscene.
The firm said each one of those actions might be unconstitutional based on similar policies already deemed unconstitutional by the courts.
Although each of those actions came with significant risk of opening the library up to a lawsuit, the move to place warning labels on books indicating s--ually explicit content and the possibility of criminal prosecution if the material was provided to a minor was noted as having “several practical shortcomings that could lead to further violations of the law.”
Not only would the labels constitute a burden on access to materials, the firm said courts would undoubtedly analyze the motives behind labeling some materials and not others. The firm added that the library would likely lose that challenge.
Some community members have noted that communications between board members and residents or allies in the push to have some books labeled would only help a suing party win a case against the library.
“For example, if the ‘s--ually explicit material’ labels tended to stigmatize protected speech or one viewpoint more heavily than another, like anti-LBGTQ+ messages vs. pro-LBGTQ+ messages, the library may be subject to liability,” the firm said in the February legal memo. “Lastly, we note that there is current litigation in federal court involving an Alabama library’s use of ‘labels’ that signaled that a material contained ‘adult’ themes and the library’s prohibition on minors accessing those materials. In that case, the parties are awaiting a hearing and/or decision on the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction.”
Yet Bolin and members of the board who supported the push continued on, and eventually sought a separate opinion from the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group that works primarily to seed Christian religious beliefs, practices and customs in public schools or other government bodies.
Bolin eventually brought a refined version of the proposed policy with labeling as the main avenue to keep LGBTQ+ themed and other materials deemed inappropriate to library staff and the board with notes from ADF attorney Paul Spena. Bolin was wary to name Spena as the attorney he was now working with to craft the policy but later relented when pressed on the issue.
...
The ACLU of Michigan formally chimed in on the policy last week, and sent the board a letter drafted by Kaplan warning members that what they were pursuing was an act of censorship, even if the titles are not banned from the library and remain within its walls, located in special sections or with new labels affixed to the covers.
“Doing so impedes the rights of library patrons and runs afoul of the First Amendment,” Kaplan wrote. “It can also harm marginalized communities who may come to places like public libraries hoping for an inclusive space, and in this particular instance, doing so with regard to LGBTQ+ titles will exacerbate that harm.”
Several community members who spoke to Michigan Advance in the course of reporting this story said that Bolin and his allies on the board were moving closer to adopting the policy despite those warnings, in essence inviting a lawsuit to be pioneers on the issue here in Michigan. Among them was Stand Against Extremism LivCo (SAGE) co-founder Julie Ohashi, who has been vocal in her opposition to the board’s actions thus far.
On Tuesday evening, Spena was expected to speak at the library board’s special meeting to discuss the policy in full. No such discussion with Spena or another attorney from the ADF occurred, and it was not clear if Spena or another member of the group were present at the meeting.
Bolin mentioned, however, that the legal discourse was changing in America, indicating that courts in the era of Trump might be turning the tide to support measures much like the one being discussed by the Cromaine District Library board.
Present at the meeting, however, were several community members, some in support of Bolin and the board’s majority on the label issue and plenty of others who said they were disheartened, dismayed and angry that the board would continue moving toward a policy they called discriminatory and clearly illegal.
As the board moved through the policy line by line, softening it due to objections from several board members out of fear of being sued and settling more on labeling as the possible avenue, those opposed to the move held signs calling on the board to not mix religion and politics. But those silent protests quickly turned vocal, with shouts and jeers rising above the din of what started as a calm meeting.
....
Although the board did not adopt a policy on Tuesday, it is expected to do so at its next meeting.
During public comment, some read lengthy diatribes laden with Christian scripture, while others lambasted the board inviting what they called a hate group to give the board legal advice and defend them if they are forced into court. One woman held up Alberta’s book while speaking, noting that Bolin’s name appeared in it multiple times, to which Bolin smiled.
Ohashi called ADF a “hate group” that has described LGBTQ+ rights as a principal threat to religious freedom, and attacking those rights was at the center of their work.
“Their goal is to trigger as many lawsuits that can get to the U.S. Supreme Court as fast as possible,” she said. “That is precisely the point. They want this to go to court, because ADF’s ultimate goal is eliminating LGBTQ+ Americans’ status as a protected class of citizens.”
Kate Mazzara of Hartland said she feared that the nation was tiptoeing toward religious fascism and that the small district library in her hometown was sliding on the same path.
“Make no mistake about it, that’s what this is,” Mazara said. “It starts with baby steps, and then it’s over.”
I find it ironic that the "do your own research" people don't, in fact, do any research and continue to spread false narratives. Colorado
Library board discusses planning, insurance issues, and Moffitt’s ALA stance at monthly meeting
https://www.theheraldtimes.com/librar...
The Meeker Regional Library Board held its regular monthly meeting last week in the community room at the Meeker Public Library. ...
Board President Moffitt responded to a letter from community member Jeni Morlan asking why he does not support the American Library Association (ALA), as he stated in a March 2025 meeting.
Founded in 1876, the ALA is the oldest and largest nonprofit professional organization for librarians in the United States. Its mission is to promote access to information, defend intellectual freedom, and support libraries and their workers. The ALA is known for opposing censorship and advocating for the inclusion of diverse viewpoints in library collections.
Moffitt cited four reasons for his opposition:
• The ALA’s focus on combating censorship of s--ually explicit materials. Moffitt believes the ALA is overly concerned with protecting and promoting s--ually controversial content in libraries.
• Its opposition to book challenges. The ALA opposes book challenges and bans, viewing them as censorship which restricts access to information and diverse viewpoints. He disagrees with that framing.
• Its political activism against funding cuts. Moffit criticized the ALA for its resistance to cost-cutting efforts like those proposed during the Trump administration, viewing the organization as politicized.
• The ideology of ALA leadership, which Moffitt described as being in “direct opposition” to his Christian worldview.
He concluded by stating he believes the ALA’s values “lead to burdens and death,” while Christianity “leads to true diversity and life.”
...
Manybooks wrote: "https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...Alberta is full of ignoramuses and bigots (certainly at the government level and in many rural areas as well)..."
and apparently they're spreading to B.C....
B.C. MLA calls for review of 'age-appropriate' resources in schools
BC Conservative MLA proposes bill for 'Parental Transparency and Age-Appropriate Education Act'
https://www.sookenewsmirror.com/news/...
A Surrey MLA has introduced legislation to begin a review of educational material in B.C. schools to ensure they are all "age-appropriate."
“Parents deserve transparency in education,” Surrey North MLA Mandeep Dhaliwal said in a press release Monday (June 2).
“This legislation empowers families, ensuring they are informed and involved in their children’s education. Our goal is simple: clarity and accountability.”
The Parental Transparency and Age-Appropriate Education Act seeks three main steps to review all books, films, pamphlets and other resources used in schools. This announcement comes after years of parents and others in the community rallying for an end to SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) 123, an educational resource available to B.C. educators to make classrooms more inclusive.
A big component of the protests has been about books available in school libraries; however, the MLA's press release does not specifically mention it is SOGI material he is targeting.
When asked, Conservative representative Ryan Painter would not specifically comment on which types of material they are looking to review.
Instead, he said parents are feeling left out of schools and "should be treated as partners in education and not seen as adversaries."
Dhaliwal's bill would see an independent committee created and a mandatory public review of all school material, after which educational resources would be labelled as to the age they are deemed appropriate for so younger students do not access them.
“Under pressure from Conservative MLAs, the Minister of Education promised to do this during the legislature's spring session. Our bill will ensure that the BC NDP government keeps its promise. We are committed to supporting parents and respecting their right to know,” said Dhaliwal, who upset former education minister Rachna Singh in the riding.
“Transparency is the cornerstone of trust and foundational to quality education.”
Most school districts across the province have learning resources policies that are made public. For Surrey's, the policy was reviewed at the end of 2023, according to Surrey Teachers' Association president Lizanne Foster.
"There is an approval process for learning resources that are in all classrooms. These resources are evaluated for age and developmental appropriateness by a team of district-appointed teachers," Foster added.
"Beyond that, they look at how it fits with the curriculum, which is also available to parents to publicly view. The team also considers the literary qualities of learning resources as well as social considerations through an equity lens."
If parents have concerns about learning materials being used, there is a formal challenging process.
"The Board believes the responsibility for the selection of learning resources belongs to practicing educators who have the skills, knowledge, and experience to assess and evaluate given resources using district criteria. Opportunities to challenge the use of a learning resource will be provided," Surrey Schools Policy 8800 states, adding that learning resources need to consider many factors.
These include fostering inclusivity, accounting for different points of views, considering diverse cultural perspectives and identities, providing opportunities to deepen knowledge of Indigenous history and culture, and teaching a spectrum of narratives to do with race, gender, disability, class and more.
Dhaliwal is also encouraging parents and others to sign an online petition to support his bill.
Illinois- anti-book ban stateSouthern Illinois is Mark Twain country, remember Huckleberry Finn? Sounds like they haven't learned anything since the 1850s.
Mississippi Valley Library District (IL) employees are working toward unionizing t o protect themselves from the library board which is censorious.
https://labortribune.com/metro-east-l...
Employees of a Metro-East library district are unionizing to fight back against book banning and what organizers are calling “right-wing assault.”
The Mississippi Valley Library District, which includes libraries in Collinsville and Fairmont City, has had a great deal of strife in recent years after conservative library board members were elected. According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the new leadership opposed LGBTQ books and events and stopped all Pride events and displays, removed books from library shelves, and began overseeing book selection.
In a 2023 meeting, Board President Jeanne Lomax was asked about LGBTQ people sharing their stories, and she replied, “They can find their role models elsewhere,” according to the Post-Dispatch.
Books relating to LGBTQ issues and sx education allegedly were removed, even banning rainbow bookmarks from the library, according to AFSCME. Lomax recruited members of a conservative church to come to board meetings and lobby against books, according to KMOV.
Community members have protested, but the conservative majority held its ground in the most recent election. The challengers argued that the board should be putting its efforts into fiscal responsibility and infrastructure, not ideological disagreements. However, two out of the three contested races went to the conservative candidates, keeping the balance with a conservative majority. The sole progressive candidate who won, Ian Ashcraft, congratulated the workers on their new union in a Facebook post.
The board had threatened jobs and benefits for workers, according to AFSCME. The board president questioned at a public meeting why 100 percent of medical care is covered for staff.
This spring, the library workers voted to organize under AFSCME Council 31. The statement from AFSCME said while the workers love their job, the treatment by library board members brought them together to make sure their jobs are secured by a contract that can’t be infringed upon by politics. The new union includes nearly two dozen employees of the library district.
“We’re really lucky… we get good benefits,” said Circulation Supervisor Amy Noakes, a union leader. “But I don’t want anyone to feel like anyone has anything to lose with their job. I want people to come to work and feel safe to be there.”
The content decisions and book bans are part of the equation as well. Noakes said they want to make sure the library stays safe and open for everyone.
“I just want people to come in and see items that represent them,” Noakes said. “I wish people weren’t out there trying to make it so hard. We are a public library. We should be available to everyone.”
...
Also organizing this spring is the staff of the Urbana (Ill.) Free Library. Nationally, AFSCME represents 25,000 workers at 275 libraries.
Library board members in Lapeer Library (MI) are still pushing for age restrictions to books in the public library collection.https://michiganadvance.com/2025/06/0...
As members of a Livingston County library board march toward restricting materials deemed inappropriate for children, a similar effort is brewing in nearby Lapeer County, part of what’s become a renewed effort in the culture war over children’s books, especially those with LGBTQ+ content.
Some members of the Lapeer District Library Board have also been working to craft a policy to keep certain materials out of children’s hands without running afoul of the law.
The effort stretches back several years to 2023, as community members sought to have several books pulled from library shelves.
Susan Hough, a member of the steering committee of Fight 4 the First, which advocates against censorship within the library district, said many of the books challenged deal with gender or LGBTQ issues.
...
Lapeer County Prosecutor John Miller suggested he might file criminal charges against employees or library officials if [Gender Queer] was not pulled from shelves. However, Amy Churchill, who was serving as the director of the library at the time, retained the ACLU of Michigan as legal counsel. The organization sent Miller a letter warning that taking action would threaten First Amendment freedoms, and violate his ethical duties as a prosecutor. When the challenge against the book was rejected, Miller took no action.
In the years since that incident, candidates with a conservative ideology have come to hold a majority of seats on the nonpartisan board, with some new members carrying ties to the initial book challenges.
In February, Hough said members of Fight 4 the First Lapeer uncovered a memo while reviewing the board’s public records responding to a request for an opinion on policies to restrict access to certain books, including proposals to move certain children’s books to an adult section, or putting certain books behind glass or the circulation desk, requiring a patron to ask for access. [This has not been the policy in public libraries for more than 100 years!... like since the ALA first began and children's libraries started.]
Anne Seurynk, an attorney with the Foster Swift law firm who the board had retained as counsel, warned that adopting any of the proposals would place the library on “at best, shaky Constitutional ground” and would put the library at risk of being sued and losing. That could saddle the district with the cost of its own attorneys fees and the fees of their legal challenger.
...
During a meeting of the Lapeer Tea Party in March, the board’s Vice Chair John DeAngelis and Secretary Peggy Brotzke discussed efforts to limit the materials children can access.
DeAngelis was unable to offer details on what these restrictions would look like, but told attendees that the board would be consulting with its attorney on the issue. He later offered a rough timeline of six months for presenting potential options.
“We don’t want to get sued. We don’t want to burn up our funds in attorney fees,” DeAngelis said .“We want to do it the right way, so it will take some time. It won’t happen overnight.”
DeAngelis and Brotzke did not respond to a request for an interview prior to publication, nor did board Chair Kari Kohlman.
DeAngelis during the Board’s March meeting put forward a motion to replace Foster Swift with a local firm, Rickard, Denney, Leichliter, Childers & Bosch, with DeAngelis saying he would like to use local counsel to keep the board’s money within the community. The motion passed with support from Kohlman, DeAngelis, Brotzke and Trustee Carol Brown, despite protest from former board chair Bill Marquardt and treasurer Perry Valle.
...
Based on Brotzke’s information request for the library’s collections policy during her first board meeting in February, Hough expects to see proposals to amend the district’s collection policy soon. The board’s next meeting is set for June 19, with Fight 4 the First Lapeer planning to hold a “Read-In for Freedom” at DeAngeli Library the same day.
The group held a similar rally in mid-May prior to a board meeting that ended up being canceled due to a lack of a quorum.
Although Brotzke and DeAngelis focused their concerns on protecting children and ensuring they are unable to access inappropriate materials, Hough said the question of what is appropriate varies from person to person.
“That’s why we have library professionals who have been highly trained in child development and in literacy and in book selection, who use many tools, including professional reviews, publisher’s reviews, etc., as well as their own personal knowledge to select books and place them in – what are considered by a professional – an appropriate place in the library,” Hough said.
When it comes to determining whether a book belongs in a library, Hough said she preferred to trust the professionals.
“I don’t know about you, but I prefer to let my medical doctor guide me in medical decisions, and I prefer to let my attorney guide me in legal decisions. And I believe library professionals have the training and the expertise to guide us in what’s appropriate,” Hough said.
Hough further noted that libraries legally cannot have obscene materials on their shelves.
While the Foster Swift memo makes clear that placing restrictions on materials could violate the U.S. Constitution, there’s no such thing as First Amendment police, Hough said. That means there’s no defense against these types of policies unless community members and free speech organizations are watching and willing to respond.
Should the board move forward with the policies and face legal consequences, Hough raised concerns about how that could impact funding for Lapeer libraries.
“That’s money that should be used to provide materials for our community, provide services, because it’s way beyond books” Hough said, pointing to other benefits like internet access and community programs. “There’s just so much in our library that enriches the community, and all of these attacks are going to end up having fiscal outcomes.”
W00t! Here's an example of a state with a Republican governor doing the right thing. Maine libraries bolster LGBTQ+ literature amid rising censorship concerns
Efforts in Maine aim to expand LGBTQ+ literature amid over 800 national book censorship attempts, with a focus on inclusive content in schools and libraries.
https://www.newscentermaine.com/artic...
...
“A big effort was to try and make sure that we are fully reflecting the community,” Kristy Kilfoyle, the executive director of Camden Public Library, said.
However, Kilfoyle sees gaps in the books made available that represent LGBTQ+ identities.
"We have specific titles that were requested by parents, saying can you add this title because it’s a title my child really needs,” Kilfoyle said.
Some of those missing titles are non-fiction books about non-binary and transgender people. But through grant funding, the library was able to expand its literature to reflect those identities.
"This allowed us to make sure that we have books for everyone,” Kilfoyle said.
However, with an increase in book challenges in recent years, Kilfoyle has concerns about potential censorship of those books.
"As libraries, we are defenders of freedom of speech, and that means an author’s voice, that means trusting that individuals have a right to decide what is good for them,” Kilfoyle said.
Leaders with OUT Maine's Read the Rainbow program have helped distribute more than 1,600 books to 80 school libraries across the state.
"Seeing yourself, seeing people with similar identities to you reflected in the stories that you're consuming is huge because stories are the way that we process the world,” Ellie Roy, the communications coordinator for OUT Maine, said.
With the grants the organization received, it will be able to expand its outreach to public libraries to include intersectional titles that depict race, gender, class, and sexual orientation for youth.
Kids are then going to be able to go to the Public Library and find a story that speaks to them on an individual level,” Roy said.
75% of the Rhode Island House of Representatives supports the Freedom to Read Act. It's unclear at the moment whether the bill will receive a hearing this session. The session ends before the end of this month.https://pvdeye.org/the-freedom-to-rea...
Mod
Alberta is full of ignoramuses and bigots (certainly at the government level and in many ru..."
Not surprising, Surrey is FULL of mini-Trumpists and they are frothing at the mouth right now anyhow, since the NDP won another mandate in BC and the Conservatives did not win the recent federal election (even though the Liberals did not win a majority but the Conservatives screwed up and are ticked off that Social conservatism is pretty unpopular except in Alberta and Saskatchewan).
Florida school book fight gets green light from federal judge, case on First Amendment rights to proceedhttps://www.orlandosentinel.com/2025/...
Three parents of Florida public school students have filed an appeal challenging the dismissal of their lawsuit, which contends that the State of Florida violated their constitutional rights by denying them the opportunity to contest school board decisions to remove books.
https://bsky.app/profile/aclufl.bsky....
Under pressure from the Florida Attorney General, the Superintendent of Hillsborough County Public Schools ordered the removal of 6 titles and temporarily removed over 600 more for review for alleged s--ual content. The National Coalition Against Censorship has written to the school board to urge them to return the books to the shelves and keep them there until they receive a formal complaint for adjudication.
https://ncac.org/news/over-600-books-...
Mod
This is just so funny. But seriously, if Elon Musk and Donald Trump get into some huge personal conflict, it might take Trump's away from tariffs, from annexation ideas etc.
Mod
I know this has NOTHING to do with book banning etc., but is just a really neat and feel-good story about two Regina, Saskatchewan sisters embracing and celebrating both their Ukrainian and their Japanese culture.
*sigh* I hope Read Freely Alabama works hard to keep this woman from getting what she wants.Library challenger running for Madison City Council
Rachel Homolak has made national news for her tactics challenging libraries in Missouri and Alabama.
https://www.alreporter.com/2025/06/06...
A woman who has made the news multiple times for challenging library books in Alabama and a transgender librarian in Missouri is running for the Madison City Council.
Rachel Homolak most recently made the news for tangling with a member of the Athens-Limestone Public Library Board in March, sending member Vicki Hereford an email including images from a youth sex education book “Let’s Talk About It” (which is not stocked at the Athens library).
“The disgusting p----graphic material that you chose to send to me twice via email – UNSOLICITED – is filth,” Hereford responded. “Because you choose to send this for whatever reason – shock value, perhaps – you are distributing the very material that you say you fight against. I will not meet with you. Do not contact me via email, phone call or text, or in person again. Any communication from you will be considered harassment and I will be forced to involve the authorities.”
Library advocates have pegged Homolak as one of the most aggressive figures pushing for the removal of certain books in the North Alabama region, with videos showing that she has approached others insistently at council and commission meetings with similar materials.
Homolak has begun distributing campaign materials announcing her candidacy for District 4 of the Madison City Council, which is currently held by two-term incumbent Greg Shaw.
Before relocating to Madison, Homolak stirred up controversy in Missouri with a campaign against a transgender librarian in St. Charles. Homolak spent months calling Danny Roberson a “pervert” and implying that Roberson posed a danger to children through constant social media criticism and in-person comments at public meetings.
Robertson has sued Homolak for defamation over her campaign, a suit that is still underway.
In Madison, Homolak has called for the council to withhold library funding if the library did not remove the materials she and others deem inappropriate for minors. The council unanimously rejected the idea of withholding funds.
...
PEN America Applauds Vital Victory for Community Members and Educators in Lawsuits Over Book Bans in Minnesota, Calls it a Model for Engagement Against Censorship - PEN Americahttps://pen.org/press-release/pen-ame...
TexasTexas Freedom to Read Project
Stories from Deep in the Heart of Texas: Nacogdoches ISD
NISD community members respond to the district's decision to ban 100+ library books based on an emailed complaint by a political activist.
https://www.txftrp.org/stories_nacogd...
The Daily Sentinel reported on May 8, 2025 that the district placed over 100 high school library books behind a "parent opt-in" restricted section of the library, after being contacted by a political activist and known book banning bully. Book banners have been sending intimidating emails containing hundreds of book titles they falsely claim are "illegal under HB 900" to school districts for the past year.
Email obtained by Texas Freedom to Read Project via a Public Information Request.
The list of 140 titles sent by the complainant (who does not live in or have children attending Nacogdoches ISD public schools), includes frequently challenged and banned modern works such as The Poet X by Elizabeth Acevedo, Flamer by Mike Curato and Beyond Magenta by Susan Kulkan. It also includes classics such as I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou, Native Son by Richard Wright, Beloved by Toni Morrison, and Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut.
Texas Freedom to Read cofounder, Frank Strong, goes into more detail about the emailed complaint, and the book list on his Substack, Anger & Clarity.
On May 15, 2025, a group of 10 Nacogdoches ISD community members that included parents, residents, and students took to their local board meeting to speak out against their school district's decision to restrict access to over 100 high school library books based on an emailed complaint and a book list sent by someone who doesn't even live there.
Listen to what Dr. Heather Olson Beal, a parent of NISD graduates and a current resident had to say. Watch her comment here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yfpe-...
E-mail the school board. Stop book bans!
https://actionbutton.nationbuilder.co...
Still waiting on Rhode Island and Mass. for their anti-book ban bills. Mass. sessions go into the summer but RI is just about done. What I got from RI yesterday is scheduled for reconsideration tomorrow and now today is "Proposed Substitute" whatever that means. What the flip? Just do it already when everyone already said they'd support it. Here's the substitute bill. It tweaks the language a bit and adds in more protections and penalties than the previous version. I'll check on it tomorrow. https://webserver.rilegislature.gov/B...
Oregon- about to become an anti-book ban state...Grants Pass School Board delays book policy discussions
https://kobi5.com/news/grants-pass-sc...
Members of the Grants Pass School Board pause discussions on a controversial policy change to instructional material. In a board meeting Tuesday, members voted 4-3 to delay a rewrite of district library and classroom material policy. The policy dictates how books and other instructional materials are deemed school-appropriate, and hasn’t been updated since 2004.
Proponents argue the rewrite is meant to ban vulgar or pornographic subject matter. But critics say the policy is too vague, and could lead to censorship of books with LGBTQ themes.
Twenty members of the community spoke their opinion in a public comment portion of the meeting. Grants Pass School Board Member Joseph Schmidt said he felt confident in his vote to delay the discussion.
TennesseeThe ACLU is fighting Rutherford County’s book bans. Here’s why.
https://wpln.org/post/the-aclu-is-fig...
Books touching on sexuality and race are being pulled off the shelves in Tennessee, and Rutherford County is at the heart of the controversy.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee is suing to keep those books in the county’s school libraries. The nonprofit has chosen Rutherford as its proving ground because of community support and strong public record.
Dozens gathered in the Patterson Park Community Center in Murfreesboro on Thursday to join the discussion about the lawsuit that challenges the Rutherford County Board of Education’s decision to restrict and ban more than 145 books in school libraries. The ACLU is arguing that these book bans violate the First Amendment.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of three Rutherford County families and PEN America — a national writers and free expression organization. The families include two rising freshmen and one rising senior who will attend Rutherford County schools next year.
Stella Yarbrough, the legal director of the ACLU of Tennessee, explained that the First Amendment not only protects one’s right to free speech but also the ability to receive information.
“When you do provide a library, one of the things that the First Amendment is clear about that you cannot do is remove books because you just don’t like their content,” she said.
...
Camellia BurrisJune 12, 2025
ACLU-TN Legal Director Stella Yarbrough and ACLU-TN Community Engagement Director Claire Gardner discuss lawsuit challenging book bans in Rutherford County during town hall meeting in Murfreesboro.
Share:FacebookThreadsX
Books touching on sexuality and race are being pulled off the shelves in Tennessee, and Rutherford County is at the heart of the controversy.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee is suing to keep those books in the county’s school libraries. The nonprofit has chosen Rutherford as its proving ground because of community support and strong public record.
Dozens gathered in the Patterson Park Community Center in Murfreesboro on Thursday to join the discussion about the lawsuit that challenges the Rutherford County Board of Education’s decision to restrict and ban more than 145 books in school libraries. The ACLU is arguing that these book bans violate the First Amendment.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of three Rutherford County families and PEN America — a national writers and free expression organization. The families include two rising freshmen and one rising senior who will attend Rutherford County schools next year.
First Amendment violations
Stella Yarbrough, the legal director of the ACLU of Tennessee, explained that the First Amendment not only protects one’s right to free speech but also the ability to receive information.
“When you do provide a library, one of the things that the First Amendment is clear about that you cannot do is remove books because you just don’t like their content,” she said.
The banned books address LGBTQ rights, race and racism. A few examples include Beloved by Toni Morrison and The Testaments –the sequel to the popular book turned television show, The Handmaid’s Tales.
The ACLU found that the banned books were very popular among students — with some having been checked out thousands of times, according to library records.
Community Support and Public Record
Yarbrough noted that book bans are happening all across Tennessee.
She credited the Rutherford County Library Alliance for alerting the ACLU about the book bans and thanked students for their willingness to speak out. That community support, Yarbrough stressed, is critical not only at the beginning of a lawsuit but even after a case is won to ensure that things actually change.
“You have to have people willing to watch every move and make sure that everything’s being complied with and so you really need buy-in from the people who are affected by the lawsuit,” Yarbrough said.
The strong public record about why the books were banned also made Rutherford County an ideal location to file the lawsuit, according to Yarbrough.
“We had the school board members stating publicly things like, ‘I don’t like these books, I won’t read them.’” she said. “One of the board members described their process as a round-robin game of insanity.”
Camellia BurrisJune 12, 2025
ACLU-TN Legal Director Stella Yarbrough and ACLU-TN Community Engagement Director Claire Gardner discuss lawsuit challenging book bans in Rutherford County during town hall meeting in Murfreesboro.
Share:FacebookThreadsX
Books touching on sexuality and race are being pulled off the shelves in Tennessee, and Rutherford County is at the heart of the controversy.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee is suing to keep those books in the county’s school libraries. The nonprofit has chosen Rutherford as its proving ground because of community support and strong public record.
Dozens gathered in the Patterson Park Community Center in Murfreesboro on Thursday to join the discussion about the lawsuit that challenges the Rutherford County Board of Education’s decision to restrict and ban more than 145 books in school libraries. The ACLU is arguing that these book bans violate the First Amendment.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of three Rutherford County families and PEN America — a national writers and free expression organization. The families include two rising freshmen and one rising senior who will attend Rutherford County schools next year.
First Amendment violations
Stella Yarbrough, the legal director of the ACLU of Tennessee, explained that the First Amendment not only protects one’s right to free speech but also the ability to receive information.
“When you do provide a library, one of the things that the First Amendment is clear about that you cannot do is remove books because you just don’t like their content,” she said.
The banned books address LGBTQ rights, race and racism. A few examples include Beloved by Toni Morrison and The Testaments –the sequel to the popular book turned television show, The Handmaid’s Tales.
The ACLU found that the banned books were very popular among students — with some having been checked out thousands of times, according to library records.
Community Support and Public Record
Yarbrough noted that book bans are happening all across Tennessee.
She credited the Rutherford County Library Alliance for alerting the ACLU about the book bans and thanked students for their willingness to speak out. That community support, Yarbrough stressed, is critical not only at the beginning of a lawsuit but even after a case is won to ensure that things actually change.
“You have to have people willing to watch every move and make sure that everything’s being complied with and so you really need buy-in from the people who are affected by the lawsuit,” Yarbrough said.
The strong public record about why the books were banned also made Rutherford County an ideal location to file the lawsuit, according to Yarbrough.
“We had the school board members stating publicly things like, ‘I don’t like these books, I won’t read them.’” she said. “One of the board members described their process as a round-robin game of insanity.”
According to an ACLU press release, the Rutherford County school board began books in the 2024 at the request of school board members. This was done without any public meeting or vote. The release further stated that the school board members relied almost exclusively on a rating system created by people associated with the conservative group, Moms for Liberty.
The ACLU of Tennessee is asking that the school board put back any books that it removed and stop banning books.
Yarbrough provided the crowd with updates in the developments of the lawsuit — noting that they recently filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. She explained that this is a request for the judge to intervene at the beginning of the case because their plaintiffs — the students and authors — will otherwise be irreparably harmed.
Supreme Court will decide cases on LGBTQ+ book censorship very soonhttps://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-co...
This term, the court heard Mahmoud v. Taylor, in which religious parents in a Maryland school district seek an opt-opt for their children from LGBTQ-themed books. ...
Mahmoud v. Taylor was brought by parents of varying faiths who have children In the Montgomery County Public Schools. When several LGBTQ-themed books were adopted for the language arts curriculum in October 2022, parents were offered an opt-out. However, it became difficult to accommodate the number of opt-outs, according to the school district, and school officials worried that students who are part of the LGBTQ+ community or have family members who are would be subjected to social stigma and isolation. The opt-out policy also put the district at risk of noncompliance with antidiscrimination laws. So the district ended the policy in 2023.
Parents sued to get the policy reinstated. Both a U.S. district court and an appeals court denied their request, so they appealed to the Supreme Court. The named plaintiff is Tamer Mahmoud, a Muslim with three children in the district, but several other parents are involved. The named defendant is Thomas W. Taylor, the Montgomery County superintendent of schools.
When the high court heard arguments in the case in April, its conservative justices appeared sympathetic to the parents.
“The plaintiffs here are not asking the school to change its curriculum,” Justice Samuel Alito said. “They’re just saying, ‘Look, we want out.’ Why isn’t that feasible? What is the big deal about allowing them to opt out of this?” Another conservative justice, Brett Kavanaugh, said he was “mystified” by the end of the opt-out policy and didn’t understand why it isn’t feasible.
Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, meanwhile, said questions of appropriate curriculum may be best solved at the local level. For her and the court’s other two liberals, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, it appeared to be a question of where the line is drawn. Sotomayor mentioned that parents could object to a variety of other content on religious grounds. These could include divorce, magic, evolution, interfaith marriage, and women’s achievements outside of traditional roles, she said.
Indeed, if the parents convince the court that including LGBTQ+ books without an opt-out provision is a violation of religious freedom, “this would open the door for parents to opt-out children for any subject they find ‘objectionable’ and sends a message to LGBTQ+ students and their families that their experiences and stories aren’t equally important,” says a Human Rights Campaign fact sheet. “Additionally, this would create major hurdles for educators and administrators, who would have to find solutions for supervision and alternative options for opted-out students — exhausting educational resources.”
If the court rules that the absence of an opt-out policy doesn’t interfere with religious liberty, “this would allow both LGBTQ+ students and their peers to continue reaping the benefits of inclusive education,” HRC says.
Mod
I hope that Donald Trump, J.D. Vance et al at least consider and accept how their own inflammatory rhetoric and behaviours have contributed to what happened and have also encouraged gun-toting, murderous crazies (especially young adult males). And I also hope that Trump would never consider any types of pardons or mitigations for the gunman once he (and hopefully ALL of his supporters and associates) are apprehended and arrested (even if they are supporters).
Arkansas families suing to block Ten Commandments in public classrooms, librarieshttps://www.usatoday.com/story/news/e...
Seven Arkansas families have filed a federal lawsuit to block a new law requiring the display of the Ten Commandments in all public school classrooms in the state, arguing that the law will infringe on their constitutional rights.
In the complaint, filed June 11 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, the families challenged an upcoming state law that requires the Ten Commandments to be "prominently" displayed in every public classroom and library. The law, which takes effect in August, was signed by Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders in April.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a multifaith group of families by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU), and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF). The defendants include four school districts — Fayetteville, Springdale, Bentonville, and Siloam Springs — in northwest Arkansas.
...
The attorneys are asking a federal judge to declare the state requirement unconstitutional. In addition to the complaint, the attorneys are planning to file a motion for a preliminary and permanent injunction to block the implementation of the law while the suit is pending.
According to the complaint, the display of the Ten Commandments in public classrooms and libraries will interfere with parents' right to direct their children’s religious education and upbringing. The lawsuit further argues that the state requirement will create a "religiously coercive" school environment for children.
Under the state law, each classroom and library will be required to post the Ten Commandments “in a conspicuous place," the lawsuit states. The display of the text must be at least 16 inches wide and 20 inches tall and be printed in a "typeface that is legible to a person with average vision from anywhere in the room," according to the complaint.
The law also mandates that schools and libraries display a specific version of the Ten Commandments, which the suit states is associated with Protestant faiths and conflicts with the version followed by many Jews and Catholics.
"Permanently posting the Ten Commandments in every classroom and library—rendering them unavoidable—unconstitutionally pressures students into religious observance, veneration, and adoption of the state’s favored religious scripture," the complaint states.
"It also sends the harmful and religiously divisive message that students who do not subscribe to the Ten Commandments ... do not belong in their own school community and pressures them to refrain from expressing any faith practices or beliefs that are not aligned with the state’s religious preferences," the complaint added.
Mod
So Elon Musk is claiming that Minnesota shooting suspect Vance Boelter is someone on the far left even though Boelter's friends and associates all point out that he clearly and solidly is an extremist Republican and as such also a huge Trump supporter. Not really surprised, but I guess it makes Musk (and probably also Trump) feel better to consider Boelter as a leftist instead of admitting that everything about Boelter is extremist Social conservatism and crazed right wing. And yes, I do at least partially blame Donald Trump's rhetoric and attitudes (and also his spokespersons and acolytes) for what happened in Minnesota but no, not himself as a person (and wish Musk, Trump et al would at least admit to that instead of trying to blame shift).
Mod
One prominent right-wing social media personality publicly speculated about whether Minnesota’s Democratic governor had unleashed an “assassin” and “ordered the political hit against a rival who voted against Walz’s plan to give free healthcare to illegals.” Elon Musk similarly blamed the “far left” for the slayings.
When there’s political violence, and the target is a Republican, partisans on the right see it as evidence that the left is dangerous. And when there’s political violence, and the target is a Democrat, partisans on the right still see it as evidence that the left is dangerous.
And I would not at all be surprised if Donald Trump believes the above, will try to make Minnesota governor Tim Walz responsible and might even decide to pardon Vance Boelter and consider him a patriot and not a murderer.
Why are far too many social conservatives often so pathetically deranged??
Oh and by the way, Mr. Trump, Tim Walz might not be perfect but at least he is not like you, with your victim blaming bullshit and more (and sorry, Donnie, but you do enable and encourage monsters like Vance Boelter and need to accept and deal with this).
*SIGH* REALLY? There are so many bigger problems in the world this week than books.Also not novel - educational work of non-fiction
not even the journalists know the difference between fact and fiction? or what a novel is?
Alabama official: Fairhope Library won’t regain funding without moving more books
https://www.al.com/news/2025/06/alaba...
The Fairhope Library Board is hopeful that after reviewing 15 challenged books in recent months, and reshelving five of them to adult sections, they will get their state funding restored.
But a member of the Alabama Public Library Services board who pushed for the Fairhope Library’s funding freeze in March, says the state money won’t be restored until all books with references to (view spoiler)
Amy Minton, a longtime critic of age-inappropriate children’s books appointed to the APLS last year, told AL.com on Monday that one of the books remaining in Fairhope’s teen section – “Doing It” by Hannah Witton – contains references to (view spoiler)
As such, the book described on Amazon.com as a s-x education novel should be reshelved into the adult section of a library, not a teen section for people ages 13-17.
Minton clarified the policy requirements in a statement to AL.com after the Library Board’s meeting: ‘We are not banning any books, but the policy clearly states all books containing any of these topics or even use of these words, have to be moved to the adult section of the library in order to receive funding from APLS.“
In contrast to Minton’s view, Fairhope library board members who reviewed the 15 books requested by APLS board chair John Wahl claim that none of them are “s--ually explicit” when considered in their full context as defined by federal law.
Two library board members were assigned to each of the books and read through them ahead of a report on each of them that was provided during Monday’s board meeting. Of the 15 books, five are being reshelved while nine others – including “Doing It” – will remain in teen sections. One of the books was not voted on.
The library board’s decisions are good for five years, meaning the books cannot be challenged again until 2030.
With “Doing It,” board chair Randal Wright and Andy Parvin read the book and neither believed it should be relocated to the adult section.
Parvin acknowledged that references to p----graphy, (view spoiler) are brought up in the book. However, he said there was no information within the book that could (view spoiler)
“Teens are very aware of these issues,” he said. He said the book had been checked out of the library only once since its release in 2018, until recently when adults had repeatedly checked it out.
He credited the book for providing a better context of s-x education than he had when he was young.
Wright said she didn’t find anything offensive written in the book.
“It’s direct,” she said. “It’s answering questions that younger kids and older teenagers have about their bodies, about changes in their bodies and about s-x. It looks at it as an understanding of what is going on.”
Angie Hayden, co-founder of the group Read Freely Alabama, said that “Doing It” is shelved in the young adult section at 75 percent of libraries throughout Alabama.
“That seems to be where it’s generally perceived to be where it belongs,” Hayden said on Tuesday. This is an age-appropriate s-x education book."
The board’s determination on whether to reshelve any of the 15 books to an older section are based on requirements that include, among other things, reviewing previous federal legal standards over what defines obscenity. That includes analyzing the book on whether it appeals to prurient interests that can be viewed as s--ually stimulating or has the potential to s---ally arouse someone.
The Fairhope board also considers “community standards” on whether a book should be relocated from one part of the library to another.
“I feel that we have followed what our policies and procedures are on this,” Wright said. “We’ve taken them into consideration, community standards for this area, and the (APLS board) wants s--ually explicit (content) moved. These books are not s--ually explicit.”
Minton said the Fairhope library can keep the books in the teen section based “only on their definition of obscenity,” but they will not receive state funding if they keep books with “(view spoiler) in the teen section
Wahl, in a statement Tuesday, said that Fairhope library officials are “fully aware” of the APLS code and obligations.
“While the library has adopted new policies that align with state code, full compliance also requires the actual relocation of se---ally explicit content from youth sections,” he said. “There are no loopholes or gray areas. The APLS Board will be glad to review the Fairhope Library Board’s decisions at our upcoming meeting, but funding will only be restored if all books containing obscenity or s--ually explicit content have been relocated.”
....
The city provides the lion’s share of the library’s annual funding of around $1 million annually, and city officials have said the library is not at risk of losing it.
...
Another issue in Fairhope is whether the city’s community standards apply in the review of library books – in other words, what type of books are available in one city may differ from what titles are provided in another.
Wright and other Fairhope library officials have argued that community standards should apply when determining whether content should remain shelved in one section as opposed to another.
Wright noted that Wahl, during a Zoom meeting with library directors in April, confirmed that a library doesn’t have to move a book even if another library in Alabama decides to shelve it in another section. Wright said at the time that Fairhope’s community concerns are different compared to Wahl and others on the APLS board.
Minton said that community standards apply to whether a “s--ually explicit” book, under the APLS’ definition of the phrase, should be included in an adult section as opposed to not being allowed in the library altogether.
“It doesn’t mean for a community to decide if they will follow the Alabama Code which clearly states books with s--ually explicit topics inappropriate for children must be moved to the adult section in order to receive APLS state funding,” she said.
Wahl, in his statement Tuesday, agreed.
“Community standards may guide a local library on how obscenity is defined, or if that library wishes to include sensually explicit books in their adult sections,” he said. “However, the definition of s--ually explicit content is clearly outlined in law and in a memo passed by the APLS board, and the relocation of explicit content must be applied consistently across all youth sections.”
Minton said that 95% of Alabama libraries are complying.
“The library board doesn’t have to spend hours reading these books,” she said. “They can open the book and see that it shows pictures or discusses how to (view spoiler)
Some of the compliance efforts have been time consuming, and have led to libraries closing their doors.
...
Minton said that any parent who wants their child or young adult to have access to books shelved in an adult section can sign a form allowing for an “all access” card to peruse a public library.
Said Wahl, “The APLS Board believes that decisions about what content children are exposed to should rest with parents. Our goal is to empower families and restore parental control over what is appropriate for their children.”
The APLS views over what constitutes “s--ually explicit” material has drawn the ire Read Freely Alabama, and others who believe reshelving books is akin to censorship. The group has also called the conservative groups like Moms for Liberty as a small group of “extremists” who are not representative of the general public.
Hayden, with Read Freely Alabama, accuses the APLS of “ever-moving goalposts” and she believes the state is intentionally being vague about what kind of books are considered “s--ually explicit.”
“It’s meant to create a sense of fear in our public library directors because their funding is very much on the line including in Fairhope,” Hayden said. “This board under it’s current leadership is using the rules as a bludgeon against our libraries so they can enforce ideology on our Alabaman citizens.”
Elizabeth Williams, the Baldwin County representative for Read Freely Alabama, said she was impressed with Fairhope’s efforts to read through the books, and believed it was enough to warrant the library’s funding to be restored.
“They followed the process and they followed the law,” Williams said, ahead of Minton’s comments.
The issue in Fairhope has sparked outcry during lengthy council meetings. Large crowds have shown up with attendees sometimes expressing heated views over library books and the city’s approach toward the issue.
Opponents to the APLS efforts blame the loss of funding in Fairhope on the conservative activist group, Moms for Liberty, whose representatives in Baldwin County have gone to Montgomery and raised their concerns directly with the APLS. The group has also scrutinized and led changes to library policies and book placements in Spanish Fort and Foley.
They also claim the APLS board is taking a subjective viewpoint over what “s--ually explicit” means to them, and not considering expert opinions from professionally trained librarians, among others.
The supporters of Moms for Liberty’s efforts, and the APLS’ code, say the effort is aimed at protecting a “vast majority” of Alabama parents from stumbling upon “explicit” content shelved in youth and teen sections while browsing for books in sections intended for young readers.
In Fairhope, library officials have criticized the APLS board make-up, and Wright has even written a letter to Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey demanding that Wahl, as chairman of the Republican Party, be removed from his role. She said the board should remain non-partisan.
She said at the APLS board meeting last month, 32 of the 37 people who spoke before the APLS board “were asking them to stop what they were doing.” She said that Wahl then said he was offended by their criticism.
“That made me clear that his constituents are not from the State of Alabama,” Wright said. “It’s this small group.”
Minton said that the APLS board instituted its policy last year after a lengthy public hearing and reading over 6,475 letters she said were overwhelmingly in favor of the new policies.
“While I appreciate all of the speakers having the right to be heard at every meeting, we are not going to change what we have already set into Alabama code (approved last year) as the public comment period is over for any changes,” she said.
New Hampshire NO!!!Library Wars, Local Focus: Police Called During Londonderry Trustees Meeting
[They're trying to DOGE the library and make impossible demands of the director so she quits.]
https://indepthnh.org/2025/06/17/libr...
Londonderry is, in many ways, the power center of New Hampshire’s increasingly conservative Republican Party. Both House Speaker Sherm Packard and Senate President Sharon Carson represent Londonderry, and they have helped to pass several bills opposed by most librarians, school boards and civil libertarians, including two co-sponsored by state Rep. Kristine Perez, R-Londonderry, who was at Saturday’s meeting.
House Bill 324, which has passed both chambers and is now before Gov. Kelly Ayotte, will make it easier for parents to get “obscene or harmful s--ual materials” removed from schools.
House Bill 273, which was ironed out in a conference committee on Monday, will require librarians to provide parents with access to their minor children’s library records, even if they are teenagers who are old enough to get their own library cards.
Opponents say the bills will burden librarians and school boards and are aimed at removing or restricting library materials with LGBTQ+ themes and characters.
However, Thomas opened the meeting by saying she had heard from worried members of the public that the Leach Library trustees were considering banning books. Not true, she said.
“It will not be done. It’s not a concern,” she said.
Saturday’s “special meeting” was called by the four conservative trustees over the objections of the other three, who had to cancel vacation plans and reschedule their jobs to attend.
The minority also alerted community members to what they called an “emergency meeting.” The library’s supporters turned out in force, with some saying they were afraid the conservative majority was trying to fire Matlin, the library director, or make her job so difficult that she would leave.
The library’s former director of children’s services, Kim Bears, who stepped down last year as chair of the board of trustees for medical reasons, cried as she spoke during the public comment period about her distress over federal, state and local cuts to library services – and attacks on librarians.
“All we want to do is give the people of this town the best library that they could have, that they deserve. We’re not hiding anything; we’re not out to get anybody,” Bears said.
“You don’t know how wonderful this staff is. You don’t know how lucky you all are. … I just want you people, please, to just stop,” she told the trustees, to loud applause from the crowd.
But the only conservative member of the public to speak, Richard Bielinski, criticized Matlin for using money from other budget lines to pay for more books and programs.
“The business end of this library is an absolute mess,” Bielinski said.
...
Londonderry Budget Committee member Patrick El-Azem cited and read the state law that says library staff only need to report the total number of donated books. [Not a list of each book donated].
Laue said the board needed to follow laws about writing themselves checks and accused them of holding at least one, unnoticed illegal meeting.
She also said that Londonderry citizens had voted to expand, not cut, library services, and she expressed frustration that board members were dragging their feet in hiring the new, fully qualified, part-time children’s librarian that voters had approved.
“The fact that you are not standing up for the library … is appalling. You are not doing your jobs,” she said. “This inept, unbelievably controlling micromanaging pattern is going to cost you your employees en masse, and you will have absolutely no capacity to replace them because you won’t be able to find anybody who’s going to work for you.”
This time, all of the trustees listened in silence before finally adjourning the meeting, just in time to set up the room for another library program.
From EveryLibrary:The Institute of Museum and Library Services, the only Federal funding source for American's libraries, has operated with a skeleton staff since April, when Trump's appointee, Keith E. Sonderling, terminated most of its 75-employee workforce and shut off millions of dollars in authorized grants after the President signed an executive order eliminating IMLS “to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law."
By doing so, the Government Accountability Office found that IMLS, led by Sonderling, violated the 1974 Impoundment Control Act.
GAO determined that Sonderling violated that law by withholding funds that Congress appropriated for grants and contracts to support libraries and museums across the country.
GAO General Counsel Edda Emmanuelli Perez wrote in her decision on Monday that IMLS officials did not cooperate with the watchdog’s investigation.
However, based on public information, including sworn statements from the agency’s acting leader as part of ongoing lawsuits, she wrote that IMLS, so far this year, has been “improperly withholding appropriated funds from obligation and expenditure.”
“Once enacted, an appropriation is a law like any other, and the President must implement it by ensuring that appropriated funds are obligated and expended prudently during their period of availability unless and until Congress enacts another law providing otherwise,” Perez wrote.
Perez wrote that IMLS, in the first five months of this year, has cut its funding by more than half, compared to spending in recent years.
Beyond grants to states, GAO found that Sonderling only obligated about 19% of IMLS's remaining budget for fiscal 2025, after cancelling millions of dollars in contracts and terminating much of its workforce.
GAO determined that Sonderling has no plans to repurpose any of the unspent funds, and its online events calendar shows no scheduled public activity since December 2024.
We want to be clear: if the administration wants to shut down IMLS or redirect its mission, it must go to Congress. The courts in the Rhode Island case and GAO have now affirmed that neither Executive Orders nor internal policy changes are substitutes for the legislative process.
Trump's proposed budget completely eliminates Federal funding for libraries.
Sign the petition today to show your support for IMLS
https://action.everylibrary.org/budge...
Then e-mail Congress!
from Kelly Jensen, BookRiot editorRight-Wing “See You at the Library” Event Back in 2025; Partners with US Department of Education
Brave Books is hosting its third “See You at the Library” event on Saturday, August 16, 2025. The now-annual event, which includes readings from “Pro-God, Pro-America” books, is a nationwide story hour that the right-wing publisher encourages its followers to host at local public libraries. Kirk Cameron and other Brave Books authors have starred as the face of the event since its inception in 2023.
However, this year’s event will feature a new partner in the initiative.
According to the See You at the Library website, the event is “In partnership with the Department of Education at the Library of Congress.” The language here is intentionally vague. As of writing, no storytime is scheduled at the Library of Congress for August 16, 2025. The Department of Education is also not a part of the Library of Congress, nor does it have any authority over the Library of Congress, and vice versa. Likewise, the map of storytimes on the See you at the Library website does not currently indicate any events on that day anywhere in the District of Columbia.
It’s not out of the question this is true. The Trump administration has taken over the Department of Education. Press releases from the Department included quotes from Moms For Liberty, who were especially excited about the new DEI snitch line intended to scare and intimidate professional educators from doing their jobs. The Department’s social media presence is a host of conspiracy theories and right-wing partisan politics paraded as fact.
Just two years ago, Brave Books claimed that the Department of Education funded public school “transitioning” programs, citing a story from the Daily Mail, a right-wing tabloid.
See You At The Library aims to stoke the moral panic around public institutions such as libraries no longer honoring “viewpoints that are foundational, time-honored, and true” in favor of “the more radical.” The events are positioned as “wholesome,” with the intent to paint the other programs and activities held at those libraries as something else entirely.
After the American Library Association responded to these events last year and the prior year, Brave Books and its author are more determined than ever to “prove” that their freedom of speech is being squashed when these events are denied at public libraries. At the center are children, who have been convenient pawns in the war on information and access to inclusive materials, events, and spaces.
Brave Books’s slate of titles aims to express a right-wing ideology, and a star within conservative circles writes each
Most events have included a time for patriotic practices like the Pledge of Allegiance and singing God Bless America. Some have included time of worship, prayer, and guest speakers and readers by other prominent authors and Christian/conservative voices. This movement mobilized thousands of families who were grateful for the much-needed biblical and Patriotic message that Kirk [Cameron] delivered. This movement comes together as one every year with “See You at the Library.”
The problem is that these are not only blatantly partisan events–something that many libraries outline in their policies as not allowed in public meeting rooms–these events also aren’t about freedom, liberty, or religious beliefs. They’re about selling Brave Books.
Although the See You at the Library event FAQs repeat that any books of “virtue” are welcome, they are also loaded with reminders that this is an event for Brave Books.
Even though other morally wholesome books are welcome for a Brave Books story time, what that means is limited in scope. Again, per the FAQs:
Screen shot from the Brave Books website: "Can I read a book of virtue that is rooted in other religions?
"Our company is built on traditional Christian values, so for this event our preference would be a book that is rooted in those beliefs."
Brave Books is also tied to SkyTree Book Fairs, a right-wing “alternative” to Scholastic Book Fairs. Scholastic Book Fairs have been a target of these groups, much like library books have been for several years.
Over the years, meeting room policies have become hot topics in libraries. Can anyone reserve a room? Do those who reserve a room need to have a library card? Can limits be placed on the kinds of groups and events that can be hosted in these publicly-funded rooms? These questions have merit and value, especially when considering how taxpayer money is used. A for-profit business setting up an event in the public library meeting room may be in direct conflict with the values of the public library.
This is why Brave Books relies on other people to reserve the rooms at the library and provides the language to use when asked about the event. Interestingly, though, their FAQs about what volunteer hosts are supposed to say when they book the event are in direct conflict with one another: are they or aren’t they hosting a Brave Books story hour?
For the release of Cameron’s first title with Brave Books, the publisher and its marketing company, Amplifi Agency, attempted to rent rooms at several public libraries. They claimed that over 50 public libraries denied their offer to host story times. But this wasn’t true. Scarsdale Library in New York explained what happened: Cameron, Brave Books, and Amplifi thought they were above the policy and ignored the formal process for using a room.
Cameron then claimed victory when he successfully rented rooms at other public libraries. Among them were the Sumner Public Library in Tennessee, where the director was fired for “unkind pushback,” and the Indianapolis Public Library, where he was initially denied. Cameron claimed the denial happened because of his race and the messages in his book; the truth is far more complicated and related to policies that he and his team chose to ignore.
What gets tricky and is worth emphasizing here is when the Freedom of Speech butts heads against Freedom of Religion and more, where both intersect with the Separation of Church and State. This is why libraries emphasize that groups are responsible for their events and why they cannot suggest the library is hosting, sponsoring, or in any way connected to it.
This year’s August 16 events, being mass-coordinated by anyone who wishes to set up a story time at their local public library, are once again a ripe opportunity for all of these elements to clash and for right-wing “activists” to proclaim that a taxpayer institution is discriminating against them. Brave Books has developed a resource kit for anyone wishing to put together one of these story times, and they have set up a map for people to drop pins for confirmed events. Doing this inevitably connects the public libraries with Brave Books, and given how few people know the actual intricacies behind library policy — and indeed, with people of this particular persuasion not wanting to care about them — the flames are about to grow hotter.
This is really sickening.York County Library (SC) Proposes Restrictions on Trans, Gender Books for Those Under 18
York County Library's board proposes new discriminatory collection policies that would bar LGBTQ+ materials from being in collections for those under 18.
https://bookriot.com/category/literar...
LGBTQ+ books could be harder to access under proposed York County library policy
York County Library is considering a book collection policy that triggered a discrimination lawsuit in another county.
During the library board’s policy committee meeting last week, chairperson Dennis Getter suggested removing any book that references transgender identity from the young adult and children’s sections and placing them in the adult section.
Getter said York County could “copy and paste” portions of the Greenville County Library System’s policy dealing with gender identity. The American Civil Liberties Union and its South Carolina affiliate filed a lawsuit against that policy in March, saying it creates obstacles for patrons who seek library materials portraying LGBTQ+ people in a positive light.
Getter read a section aloud while making his proposal.
“The Library System recognizes that parents/legal guardians have a fundamental right to be involved in all aspects of their minor children’s lives, especially in matters as life changing as gender identification,” the policy states in part. “Therefore, materials targeting audiences aged 13-17 with characters who have transitioned or are in the process of transitioning from a gender that corresponds to their biological sex to a different gender will be located in the Adult Collection.”
That includes stories that “celebrate, portray, or affirm gender transitioning.”
In the children’s section for ages 0-12, any book that discusses a minor’s appearance in a way inconsistent with their biological sex would be relocated to the parenting and early childhood collection.
“I really think that this is wonderful,” Getter said.
Getter also suggested the library use ratedbooks.org to help review and select books. The website assigns ratings from 0 to 5 based on how objectionable a book’s content is “for the sole purpose of alerting parents of the dangers available to children in public and government school libraries,” according to its website.
The current book selection process involves a team of librarians who scour professional journals, book reviews and bestseller lists to see what might be a good fit for their community.
The policy committee will meet every other week to discuss the new proposal until it is ready to bring its findings to the board, Getter said. He did not provide a timeline for when that might be.
Under the collection policy, Greenville libraries removed critically acclaimed titles from children’s shelves and created access barriers, according to the ACLU. Books about LGBTQ+ people are disproportionately impacted.
Removed titles include “Julian is a Mermaid” by Jessica Love, which is about a young boy who dresses like a mermaid, and “Ana on the Edge” by A.J. Sass, which follows a non-binary 12-year-old figure skater. Greenville has not moved books that advocate against gender transition, the ACLU said.
The ACLU is representing multiple families whose kids don’t have access to LGBTQ+ material because they lack adult library cards. The lawsuit filed in federal court claims Greenville County is violating the First Amendment because it uses policy to enforce moral agendas.
One family said they want their child, who is transgender, to have privacy over the books he reads without having to ask his parents for their card. He cannot access books with transgender characters on his own even if they are geared toward his age range, the lawsuit said.
“By design, the exclusion also inflicts a dignitary injury on LGBTQ individuals by treating identities and experiences of LGBTQ children and their parents as unacceptable and unworthy of inclusion in public space,” the lawsuit states.
Getter’s proposal garnered the ire of Support York County Libraries, a community group focused on challenges facing local libraries. The advocacy group regularly attends library meetings to keep tabs on board actions.
several parents messaged the board in protest. They characterized the policy as censorship of a marginalized community and a potential waste of taxpayer money should York County face a similar suit.
Founding member Laura Catto said Support York County Libraries is disappointed by the policy committee discussion. Adopting the Greenville County policy would be “irresponsible and costly,” she said.
“Our libraries should reflect the full diversity of York County, and that includes offering books that represent all of our community’s families and identities,” Catto told The Herald. “This proposal is not only discriminatory, but it also puts our county at serious legal and financial risk.”
Are there ANY books LEFT in Escambia County? Here's the easy solution: Fire Vicki Blodgett, lock her up in a mental institution and throw away the key. Repeat with Bruce whatshisname. Repeat again with the state education commissioner and attorney general. If you don't want your children exposed to anything that interferes with your beliefs, you know what the answer is and it's not public school!Escambia County School Board bans 15 books from media centers
https://www.wkrg.com/northwest-florid...
School Board member Kevin Adams of District 1 brought the list of books to the board’s workshop meeting on Monday.
The books are adult novels that Superintendent Keith Leonard said in a statement, “contain graphic descriptions and depictions of s--ual conduct which are not appropriate for minors in Escambia County Public Schools.”
“The Escambia County School Board directs the superintendent delay media center purchases until processes are in place to prevent obscene p---graphic, age-inappropriate books from entering the school district,” said Adams.
School board members want to move through the book removal process as quickly as possible to ease the worries of parents.
“We have received 236 challenged books, only 48 have been reviewed, so I want to make sure we expedite this as much as possible and give parents that sense of relief that their children are not going to be exposed to anything that they do not want,” District 4 School Board Member Carissa Bergosh said.
Bergosh said she’s received phone calls and emails from both sides of this issue.
“You have to look at this from an educator and also as a parent and as a parent, I would not want my children to be exposed to anything that may interfere with our beliefs,” she added.
Three more books are being removed based on a recommendation by the Florida attorney general who said the books have obscene content. Those books are What Girls are Made of, Elana Arnold; Beautiful, Amy Reed; and Breathless, Jennifer Niven.
https://www.pnj.com/story/news/local/...
This week's round-up from BookRiot editor Kelly JensenYancey County (NC) pulled their libraries out of a consortium with other libraries over a Pride display. Now, residents plan to sue.
PAYWALLED
https://subscribe.citizen-times.com/r...
Last-ditch legal effort tries to halt NC regional library system breakup over LGBTQ+ content
Yancey prepares to exit library system. Grassroots group hires law firm to counter those plans, which they say violate rights, waste money.
https://carolinapublicpress.org/71307...
With less than two weeks before Yancey County officially exits its regional public library system, opponents to the change are making a last-ditch legal effort to force the county to reverse course. The two-year-long debate over the future of the library in Burnsville began with residents’ complaints over a Pride Month display in 2023.
Resident and local Democratic leader Landon Beaver started a crowdfunding campaign last month which has raised more than $48,000 to date, enough to pay the retainer fees of North Carolina law firm Brooks Pierce.
Beaver told Carolina Public Press his goal is to file a First Amendment lawsuit against the county and secure an emergency hearing for an injunction on the library transition, which is set to happen July 1.
Collins Saint, an attorney for Brooks Pierce specializing in education law and civil rights litigation, confirmed that the firm was representing Beaver, but that no lawsuit had been filed as of Wednesday. Beaver called the state of things a “developing legal situation,” but remained optimistic that there remained enough time to file a lawsuit and pause the library transition before the end of the month.
Meanwhile, Yancey County and the regional library system — both of which have been preparing for the transition over the past year — told CPP that they have little reason to think the exit won’t happen as planned.
“We haven’t had any discussions on that,” Yancey County Manager Lynn Austin said of the potential lawsuit. “We’re just looking to move forward (on) July 1.”
County commissioners first announced their intent to leave the Avery-Mitchell-Yancey Regional Library last June.
That decision followed a tumultuous year in which Yancey overhauled the public advisory board for its library branch, which included the appointment of residents who decried books featuring LGBTQ+ characters and themes as inappropriate for children.
Since then, Yancey has charged ahead with its planned exit by applying for state grants and hiring replacements for the current Yancey library staff, all of whom are employees of the regional library system.
Residents opposed to the change fear that they will be paying more in taxes for lessened services. They stand to lose regional system benefits such as its children’s librarian and digital literacy program.
They’ve organized “solidarity walks” and shown up at commissioners’ meetings urging them to reconsider the exit. Still, the county has remained steadfast in its desire for greater freedom over library operations.
“(A lawsuit) was the absolute last resort,” Beaver said. “Hence the marches and the speaking last year, trying to get the commissioners to see that this was not in the best interest of the community and not the best use of financial resources.”
...
Beaver criticized board chairman Jeff Whitson’s stated vision of an “unbiased library” as a justification for limiting freedom of expression and breaking with the regional library system.
“To say that we won’t have any displays, we won’t have anything divisive in the library, that’s just going to start looking like an echo chamber to a certain set of people,” Beaver said.
“That’s not what a library is, and that’s not how the First Amendment works.”
...
What might happen if Yancey County does not exit its regional library system on July 1, by judicial order or otherwise, is an untested question.
Earlier this month the county approved its budget for the upcoming fiscal year, which included more than $300,000 for the library. It already hired three full-time employees to replace the outgoing regional employees.
The regional system, too, has transition plans in place. It will change its name to the Toe River Valley Regional Library, and a new interlocal agreement was drafted by Avery County, Mitchell County and the Town of Spruce Pine earlier this year.
Current regional director Amber Westall Briggs told CPP that she doesn’t expect the transition to be nixed given the work done on both sides to make it happen, although it is a possibility that she’s discussed with her staff.
“If (Yancey) did not withdraw and they changed their mind, I would imagine we would go on as we normally would,” Briggs added.
That would leave Yancey with the problem of figuring out how to reverse course after already having passed a budget and hiring new employees.
Florida again.Fearing new state push, Orange, Osceola yank more books from schools
The districts acted after the AG and Board of Education squared off with Hillsborough County
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2025/...
Battling on a new front in Florida’s ongoing school book disputes, Orange and Osceola school districts have each pulled more than a dozen books that the state’s education board called “p----graphic” on a list sent to another school district last month.
The latest removals follow the mounting state pressure on Hillsborough County Public Schools, where its superintendent faced a barrage of questions from the state’s education board last week about materials in schools that Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier had decried.
Hillsborough in recent weeks received two letters, one from Uthmeier and the other from Education Commissioner Manny Diaz Jr, ordering the removal of “inappropriate” books from its schools.
The state included a list of more than 50 books it deemed pornographic, which appeared to have been copied from an advocacy group called Citizens Defending Freedom. Other district superintendents then asked for those lists in order to check with their own libraries.
In the minds of school officials in Hillsborough, Orange and elsewhere, the letters went beyond the book review process articulated in state law, which creates a citizen complaint process and local school board review of challenged books. Many more books have been removed through that process, but state officials have not previously singled out books for districts to remove.
Nevertheless, Orange in a school board meeting last week chose to remove 13 of the books that appeared on the new list, including six that had previously been reviewed by the district and retained. Those books include “Forever” by Judy Blume, “Last Night at the Telegraph Club” by Malinda Lo, “Forever for a Year” by B. T. Gottfred, “And They Lived…” by Steven Salvatore, “Homegoing” by Yaa Gyasi and “Red Hood” by Elana K. Arnold.
Other books on the state list either already had been removed or were not in OCPS schools.
Osceola removed 14 books from its shelves, according to a district spokesperson, and other districts across the state are expected to follow suit in the coming weeks.
Orange County’s school board, which met last week to discuss the removals, decided to pull the books out of an abundance of caution, it said. Keeping any of the books on district shelves could open the district up to further state scrutiny, district legal counsel John Palmerini told the board last week.
“While I disagree with their determination that these books are pornographic as the law defines it … I think it would be perilous for this board to allow these books to remain on the shelves,” Palmerini said.
Orange superintendent Maria Vazquez said that while the district had not received letters from the state about its classroom libraries, as Hillsborough had, she interprets the state’s pressure on Hillsborough County as meaning they “have to be removed” from OCPS schools.
Board members reluctantly agreed to remove the books, with several saying that the state was overstepping the district’s statutory authority to judge challenged books.
Board Member Angie Gallo said the state’s list was “sidelining due process” and infringed on the First Amendment.
“Today it’s books. Tomorrow, it could be something else,” she said.
But members also said there’d been too much district time and money spent on reviewing books when most students don’t even check books out from school libraries.
Board Member Melissa Byrd called it a “non-issue that was made an issue” because of politics. She said phones pose more of a threat to kids given what they can access from the internet.
“If they want more books pulled off our shelves, they can continue to tell us that, because I don’t think that we need to be spending another dime, another minute of staff time on this issue. We have got bigger things to worry about, and I’m tired of it. I’m tired of talking about it,” Byrd said.
Such self-censorship seems to be the goal, said Stephana Ferrell, co-director of the Florida Freedom to Read Project. She understands why the board removed the books, but she wishes members had stuck by their community, which she said is against removing the books.
“This isn’t just about books at this point. This is about local control and our ability to have the public education system that the parents of Orange County would like for their students,” Ferrell said.
She said districts across the state will likely follow Orange’s lead on preemptively removing books, with several other district school boards convening this week.
Orange already has removed hundreds of books from shelves in it libraries and classrooms in the past few years as a result of state legislation governing content in Florida schools. In the 2023-24 school year, Orange removed about 675 books for fear they violated the law prohibiting content involving “s--ual conduct.”
Why the ACLU is fighting to keep books on shelves in Rutherford County, Tennessee, school libraries.https://wpln.org/post/the-aclu-is-fig...
Camellia BurrisJune 12, 2025
ACLU-TN Legal Director Stella Yarbrough and ACLU-TN Community Engagement Director Claire Gardner discuss lawsuit challenging book bans in Rutherford County during town hall meeting in Murfreesboro.
Share:FacebookThreadsX
Books touching on sexuality and race are being pulled off the shelves in Tennessee, and Rutherford County is at the heart of the controversy.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee is suing to keep those books in the county’s school libraries. The nonprofit has chosen Rutherford as its proving ground because of community support and strong public record.
Dozens gathered in the Patterson Park Community Center in Murfreesboro on Thursday to join the discussion about the lawsuit that challenges the Rutherford County Board of Education’s decision to restrict and ban more than 145 books in school libraries. The ACLU is arguing that these book bans violate the First Amendment.
ACLU-TN Legal Director Stella Yarbrough and ACLU-TN Community Engagement Director Claire Gardner discuss lawsuit challenging book bans in Rutherford County during town hall meeting in Murfreesboro.
Share:FacebookThreadsX
Books touching on sexuality and race are being pulled off the shelves in Tennessee, and Rutherford County is at the heart of the controversy.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee is suing to keep those books in the county’s school libraries. The nonprofit has chosen Rutherford as its proving ground because of community support and strong public record.
Dozens gathered in the Patterson Park Community Center in Murfreesboro on Thursday to join the discussion about the lawsuit that challenges the Rutherford County Board of Education’s decision to restrict and ban more than 145 books in school libraries. The ACLU is arguing that these book bans violate the First Amendment.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of three Rutherford County families and PEN America — a national writers and free expression organization. The families include two rising freshmen and one rising senior who will attend Rutherford County schools next year.
Stella Yarbrough, the legal director of the ACLU of Tennessee, explained that the First Amendment not only protects one’s right to free speech but also the ability to receive information.
“When you do provide a library, one of the things that the First Amendment is clear about that you cannot do is remove books because you just don’t like their content."
...
Yarbrough noted that book bans are happening all across Tennessee.
She credited the Rutherford County Library Alliance for alerting the ACLU about the book bans and thanked students for their willingness to speak out. That community support, Yarbrough stressed, is critical not only at the beginning of a lawsuit but even after a case is won to ensure that things actually change.
“You have to have people willing to watch every move and make sure that everything’s being complied with and so you really need buy-in from the people who are affected by the lawsuit,” Yarbrough said.
The strong public record about why the books were banned also made Rutherford County an ideal location to file the lawsuit, according to Yarbrough.
Camellia BurrisJune 12, 2025
ACLU-TN Legal Director Stella Yarbrough and ACLU-TN Community Engagement Director Claire Gardner discuss lawsuit challenging book bans in Rutherford County during town hall meeting in Murfreesboro.
Share:FacebookThreadsX
Books touching on sexuality and race are being pulled off the shelves in Tennessee, and Rutherford County is at the heart of the controversy.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee is suing to keep those books in the county’s school libraries. The nonprofit has chosen Rutherford as its proving ground because of community support and strong public record.
Dozens gathered in the Patterson Park Community Center in Murfreesboro on Thursday to join the discussion about the lawsuit that challenges the Rutherford County Board of Education’s decision to restrict and ban more than 145 books in school libraries. The ACLU is arguing that these book bans violate the First Amendment.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit on behalf of three Rutherford County families and PEN America — a national writers and free expression organization. The families include two rising freshmen and one rising senior who will attend Rutherford County schools next year.
First Amendment violations
Stella Yarbrough, the legal director of the ACLU of Tennessee, explained that the First Amendment not only protects one’s right to free speech but also the ability to receive information.
“When you do provide a library, one of the things that the First Amendment is clear about that you cannot do is remove books because you just don’t like their content,” she said.
The banned books address LGBTQ rights, race and racism. A few examples include Beloved by Toni Morrison and The Testaments –the sequel to the popular book turned television show, The Handmaid’s Tales.
The ACLU found that the banned books were very popular among students — with some having been checked out thousands of times, according to library records.
Community Support and Public Record
Yarbrough noted that book bans are happening all across Tennessee.
She credited the Rutherford County Library Alliance for alerting the ACLU about the book bans and thanked students for their willingness to speak out. That community support, Yarbrough stressed, is critical not only at the beginning of a lawsuit but even after a case is won to ensure that things actually change.
“You have to have people willing to watch every move and make sure that everything’s being complied with and so you really need buy-in from the people who are affected by the lawsuit,” Yarbrough said.
The strong public record about why the books were banned also made Rutherford County an ideal location to file the lawsuit, according to Yarbrough.
“We had the school board members stating publicly things like, ‘I don’t like these books, I won’t read them.’” she said. “One of the board members described their process as a round-robin game of insanity.”
According to an ACLU press release, the Rutherford County school board began books in the 2024 at the request of school board members. This was done without any public meeting or vote. The release further stated that the school board members relied almost exclusively on a rating system created by people associated with the conservative group, Moms for Liberty.
The ACLU of Tennessee is asking that the school board put back any books that it removed and stop banning books.
Yarbrough provided the crowd with updates in the developments of the lawsuit — noting that they recently filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. She explained that this is a request for the judge to intervene at the beginning of the case because their plaintiffs — the students and authors — will otherwise be irreparably harmed.
three YA books were given restrictions (still censorship) in St. Johns schools (FL).https://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/lo...
Board officials decided to take “Check & Mate” and “Monday’s Not Coming” out of middle schools and restrict them to only ninth through twelfth grade, with parents’ permission to check out.
Meanwhile, “There is Someone Inside Your House” was restricted to only high school seniors, also with parental permission.
“My son was 18 in 11th grade. So you’re now saying a grown adult is restricted from reading a book of his choice?” St. Johns County parent Carole Gauronskas outlined. “There’s too many reasons to see that banning a book is a bad thing.”
“This is a book about a serial killer slashing people described in detail,” St. Johns County parent Jean Moore said. “This content would be considered rated R and not appropriate for schools.”
While many parents spoke out in support of both protecting and restricting those books in St. Johns County Schools, some also questioned the current book restriction process itself.
“Reliance on the opt-out form deflects responsibility away from the fact that this board has no control over the media center contents,” Moore accused the board of. “I’m sorry to say that this board and district administration has refused to create clear standards and guidelines as to what is considered acceptable and age-appropriate for minor children placed in your care.”
Now, the school board plans to meet for a workshop session before the start of the next school year to review their process, including a possible permission slip for books parents would sign, and a movie-like ratings system.
However, school board chair Anthony Coleman said he’s cautious of either idea.
“I think we probably want to be careful with the ratings because kids are watching movies on their phones and all of this,” Coleman said. “Our media specialists are the professionals. And if we’re doing it correctly, it will already be worked out in itself.”
Muscatine, Iowa’s public library was the latest recipient of a bomb threat.https://www.wqad.com/video/news/local...
ArkansasNOT obscene people, really? In what world?
Drama
The Best Man
Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy: A Modern Graphic Retelling of Little Women
Here’s a good look at how what happens in individual school districts when it comes to book bans then makes its way to state-level legislation. This example comes from Arkansas.
https://arkansasadvocate.com/2025/06/...
Law limiting access to LGBTQ books in school libraries began with rural Arkansas district
Lawmakers who represent Mountain Pine sponsored a 2025 law requiring “non-age-appropriate s--ual content” in K-5 schools to be locked away
A rural Arkansas school district limited elementary school students’ access to nine books with LGBTQ+ characters and themes two years ago, according to district documents obtained via a public records request.
The Mountain Pine School District board approved the restrictions at the same time that children’s access to LGBTQ+ content in school and public libraries became a hot-button issue throughout Arkansas, and the board’s decision spawned a new state law that will go into effect in August.
The nine restricted titles, all aimed at students between 2nd and 5th grade, are only available to Mountain Pine Elementary School students whose parents or guardians provide written permission. Arnold and Mary Stone, whose child was in fourth grade at the time, petitioned the Garland County school on March 27, 2023 to remove three books they found objectionable from the library.
The five-member school board unanimously voted three days later to “pull any books that deal in s--ual orientation, s--ual lifestyle or gender preference from the general shelves in the Elementary library,” according to board meeting minutes.
This “temporary decree will be in effect until a new policy is approved by the school board,” according to the minutes.
As of Friday, the three challenged books, as well as six others, are still filed as “Restricted: Parent Note Required” in Mountain Pine Elementary’s online library catalog.
The Mountain Pine district has two schools and 585 students, according to the Arkansas Department of Education website.
In 2003, a federal court decided the Cedarville School District violated the First Amendment by requiring signed permission slips from parents to allow their children to read the Harry Potter books.
This was not a concern for state Rep. Richard McGrew, a Hot Springs Republican who represents Mountain Pine, when he drafted and presented Act 917 of 2025 in the Legislature, he said Friday.
Act 917 requires public elementary schools to “store non-age-appropriate s--ual content, including without limitation a book or other resource that is located in the library media center that is available to the public, in a locked compartment within a designated area.”
Students would only be able to access these materials with parental permission, and McGrew told the House Education Committee in March that this policy arose from a situation in his district.
“In some aspects, it makes it easier if a parent wants their child to learn about something that, quite frankly, I wouldn’t want my child to learn about,” McGrew said.
He also said the “designated area” required in the law can be anywhere in the school building, not specifically in the library.
The law defines “non-age-appropriate s--ual content” as “any materials that include explicit instruction, promotion, or advocacy of s--ual ideology, behaviors, or orientations that are not developmentally appropriate for kindergarten through grade five (K-5) students.”
The books the Stones challenged in Mountain Pine do not depict s--ual activity, elementary school librarian Jennifer Wendell wrote in her response to the challenges, obtained via an Arkansas Freedom of Information Act request.
“The content within these books consists of nothing more ‘s--ual’ than talking about crushes and chaste kisses,” Wendell wrote.
All school libraries are required to have library content challenge policies in order to be accredited by the state Department of Education. McGrew said Act 917 does not change that.
Instead, Act 917 requires schools to issue a warning to a teacher or media specialist who “knowingly failed to comply with” the law upon the first alleged violation. The second offense would lead to a formal complaint to the Professional Licensure Standards Board, which has the authority to suspend education licenses.
Upon the third offense, the licensure board would be required to revoke the educator’s license. Legislative Democrats expressed opposition to this aspect of the bill, and Rep. Steve Magie of Conway was the only Democrat in either chamber to vote for it.
Act 917 passed the majority-Republican Legislature with 75 of 100 House members’ support and 28 of 35 senators’ support. The law initially failed to pass the Senate, garnering only 16 senators’ support.
Sen. Matt McKee, R-Pearcy, was the law’s Senate sponsor and also represents Mountain Pine.
Other legislation
In their book challenge forms to Mountain Pine Elementary, the Stones cited a proposed state policy: Senate Bill 81, which Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed into law as Act 372 of 2023 the day after the Mountain Pine school board’s vote to restrict certain books.
A federal judge in 2024 blocked the section of Act 372 that would have allowed criminal liability for school and public librarians for disseminating materials some consider “obscenity.” The state is appealing the injunction, which also prevented city and county elected officials from having the final say over whether to relocate challenged public library materials on the basis of “appropriateness.”
Act 372 gives school boards the authority to relocate challenged school library books. This section was not challenged in court, but Wendell pointed out in her response to the Stones that it was not state law at the time.
The Stones’ challenge forms also cited the LEARNS Act of 2023, a wide-ranging education law that includes a ban on teaching of “sexually explicit materials,” gender identity or sexual orientation in classrooms before 5th grade.
LEARNS did not go into effect until three months after the Stones submitted their book challenges, and the books in question were never used in classroom instruction, Wendell said.
“As these challenged books deal with relevant and timely topics in ways that independent reviewers and I deemed age-appropriate/developmentally appropriate, I felt they were beneficial additions to our school collection,” Wendell wrote. “…Removing these books based on the personal belief that homosexuality is not developmentally appropriate for children to be exposed to is a violation of our students’ First Amendment rights and opens our district to potential legal issues and lawsuits.”
Wendell’s response is dated March 31, 2023, the day after the school board voted to approve the book restrictions.
Mountain Pine School District Superintendent Tish Knowles said Friday that some parents in the district have expressed appreciation for the restrictions and that she has not heard any concerns about potential First Amendment violations. Knowles was not yet the district’s superintendent in March 2023.
The Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators did not respond to requests last week for comment on Act 917. McGrew told his fellow lawmakers the organization worked with him on the legislation’s language. Knowles said no one at the Mountain Pine School District helped write the law.
McGrew emphasized that the sequestered books would not be removed from school premises. Act 372 did not pass the House Judiciary Committee in 2023 until it had been amended to say library materials would be relocated to an area inaccessible to minors, not removed from the school or public library entirely, if elected officials find them to be “obscene.”
The law provides libraries no guidance on creating an area that minors cannot access, and it does not limit challenges based on “appropriateness” for minors, U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks wrote in his ruling against the challenged portions of Act 372.
Brooks also wrote that the law “could allow “the views of a vocal few [to] dictate what is generally available to the public” and “decide on any basis they choose” whether to relocate or remove a book.
The North Dakota GOP voted to censure state governor Kelly Armstrong since he didn’t allow them to ban books in the state.https://archive.ph/xqPdX
Port: Gov. Armstrong censured over book ban veto as MAGA populists take control of NDGOP
"I don't care," Armstrong said in response to the censure. The NDGOP also reported a more than $91,000 financial loss in 2024.
...at a reorganization meeting at the NDGOP's state headquarters in Bismarck, as "No King" protests waved signs across the street, the party elected Matthew Simon as its new chair, and censured Gov. Kelly Armstrong over his veto of book ban legislation.
...
However, the populists did manage to pass censure resolutions against Gov. Kelly Armstrong. The resolutions don't have any real world weight. Rather they condemn actions the party deems inappropriate.
One resolution states that "the North Dakota Republican Party expresses its deep disappointment in the failure to enact Senate Bill 2307 due to the Governor’s veto and the Legislature’s inability to override it."
Resolution Calling on the North Dakota Legislature to Right the Wrong of Leaving Our Children Vulnerable Following the Veto of Senate Bill 2307
WHEREAS, the North Dakota Republican Party affirms the fundamental right of every child to be protected from harm and exploitation, and recognizes the sacred duty of the state to defend the innocence and well-being of its youngest citizens; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 2307 was passed by the North Dakota Legislative Assembly in 2025 as a necessary measure to safeguard children from dangerous, irreversible medical interventions and harmful ideologies that threaten their health, identity, and development; and WHEREAS, despite the bill’s passage by the duly elected representatives of the people, Governor Kelly Armstrong issued a veto of Senate Bill 2307, rejecting this critical effort to defend North Dakota’s children; and WHEREAS, the North Dakota Legislature subsequently failed to secure the votes necessary to override the Governor’s veto, thereby leaving minors across the state unprotected and vulnerable; and WHEREAS, the people of North Dakota—including parents, medical professionals, and faith communities—overwhelmingly support strong legal protections for children and expect decisive leadership from their elected officials; and WHEREAS, the North Dakota Republican Party stands for parental rights, biological reality, and the protection of children from coercion, confusion, and irreversible harm; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the North Dakota Republican Party expresses its deep disappointment in the failure to enact Senate Bill 2307 due to the Governor’s veto and the Legislature’s inability to override it; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the North Dakota Republican Party calls upon all Republican legislators to make it a top priority in the 2027 legislative session to reintroduce and pass legislation that fully protects children from gender transition procedures and other harmful interventions, and to ensure that such protections are enacted into law—veto or no veto; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the North Dakota Republican Party urges the Republican Caucus in both chambers to coordinate efforts now to secure the votes necessary to override any future veto that threatens the safety and future of North Dakota’s children; and BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to all Republican members of the North Dakota State Legislature and to the Governor of North Dakota for theirconsideration.BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:1. The NDGOP shall ensure that this resolution be posted on the official website ndgop.org indefinitely 2. The designated website administrator is authorized and directed to oversee the posting and to ensure that the resolution remains accessible online indefinitely.59
3. Should circumstances require removal or update of the posted material, such action shall be documented and approved by the NDGOP Executive Committee.4. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption and shall remain in force until explicitly amended or rescinded by the NDGOP State Committee.
Senate Bill 2307 was a book ban bill. The resolution passed 32-17.
Armstrong was blunt when .. contacted ... about the censure: "I don't care," he said.
"If the party does as much to oppose me as they've done to support me since 2018, I think I'll be fine," he added.
This isn't the first time the NDGOP has considered a censure resolution for Armstrong. In 2023, the party nearly passed a resolution objecting to Armstrong's vote in favor of codifying same sex marriage in federal law.
Kelly Jensen reports on the ludicrous:This letter to the editor is from a resident user of Garland County Library (AR). They’re mad that the library allows anyone to borrow any book. No, really. They stole their child’s card to see if it was “true.”
https://www.hotsr.com/news/2025/jun/1...
NO! Scary news close to home.New Haven Public Library evacuated due to reported bomb threat
https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/l...
Children's Books
Books mentioned in this topic
Out of the Blue (other topics)The Princess in Black and the Prince in Pink (other topics)
My Rainbow (other topics)
Butt or Face? Volume 3: Super Gross Butts (other topics)
The Day the Books Disappeared (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Jodi Picoult (other topics)Sarah J. Maas (other topics)
Ellen Hopkins (other topics)
Jodi Picoult (other topics)
Scott Stuart (other topics)
More...
The beleaguered Samuels Public Library may now be taken over by a private company. The vote was delayed this week, but this won’t be going away.
Warren supervisors to consider new library contract at Tuesday meeting
https://www.nvdaily.com/nvdaily/warre...
The Warren County Board of Supervisors is set to consider a proposed contract Tuesday with the library-management company Library Systems & Services to provide library services to county residents.
Supervisors authorized the Warren County Library Board to begin negotiations with LS&S at the end of April. Last week, the library board approved the contract, which needs final approval by supervisors.
The contract calls for the county to pay LS&S $1.024 million to provide library services, but does not identify where those services will be offered or when they will begin. The contract figures in an estimated $236,000 in state funding as well as an additional $46,643 in contributions, donations, fines and fees for a total operating budget of $1.306 million.
The nonprofit Samuels Public Library has provided library services in Warren County through public-private partnerships for decades. Supervisors voted this spring not to renew Samuels’ contract and instead issued a Request for Proposals.
Samuels officials said that the library could not compete in the RFP process due to its nonprofit status and RFP requirements that would have forced it to give up operational oversight. LS&S was the winning bidder in that process.
The idea of seeking RFP bids arose in the fall, following a library debrief report by supervisors Richard Jamieson and Vicky Cook. Jamieson and Cook indicated that they believed the county could save significant money by using a library vendor.
The proposed LS&S contract is for the same amount that Samuels sought from the county in an amended budget request submitted this spring.
According to documents released Thursday afternoon as part of the supervisors’ agenda packet release, the contract calls for a 10-year agreement between the county and LS&S and includes a withdrawal clause that will cost the county money if it is terminated early. For instance, if the agreement is terminated on or before June 30, 2026, the county would pay LS&S $250,000. The figure goes down by $25,000 annually from there.
The proposed contract says that the county will provide a facility for library operations, including furniture, furnishings, equipment, collections, supplies, records, files and data used or useful in the operation of the library.
The county would be responsible for major capital repairs, emergency systems and structural maintenance, including HVAC, roofing, plumbing, and electrical systems. Further, the county would be responsible for landscaping and grounds maintenance and technology and telecommunications, including periodic replacement of aged or obsolete equipment as outlined in the contract.
The county library board would be responsible for creating LS&S’s collection development policy while the vendor would select materials. According to the contract, LS&S will include a fee of 10% of the cost of library materials as a materials handling fee.
As outlined in the contract, LS&S will contribute $125,000 in the upcoming fiscal year to revitalize the library’s collection and donate $150,000 to commission a mobile outreach van. However, if the county terminates the lease early it will be required to pay back that money on a prorated schedule.
The contract does not specify where LS&S will provide service...
Reached by phone on Friday, Melody Hotek, president of the Samuels Board of Trustees, said she has many concerns about the proposed contract.
She said she believes the county will be paying more for library services through LS&S, noting that maintenance and technology costs — which the county is not currently paying for Samuels — are included in the contract. She wondered if the county will pay toward payroll taxes, retirement and employee benefits for LS&S employees, noting that it currently does not.
“They’re using us as a model to write the contract. They’re paying more for it and yet they’re going to end up with diminished services. At what cost? It’s not like they’re improving upon the model we already have. Where is the savings? If you’re using us as a model, that means we’re already doing a good job in what you’re expecting so what is the point in all this?” Hotek said.
She said the 10% material handling fee outlined in the contract “blew her mind” and wondered if LS&S had met the June 1 deadline to file for state funding for library services.
Hotek noted that the hours outlined in the contract match Samuels’ hours and that programming requirements reflect those already offered by the library.
...