Library and Book Ban News 7-4-2025
Sorry, friends, it's not good. Mahmoud v. Taylor
Hello Friends,
This week has been brutal. I hope you find some Fourth of July activities that fill you with renewed hope. Since it’s Friday, I want to go ahead with the newsletter on schedule.
While the week was full of significant losses, we’re still concentrating on the library and book ban news here. There are a few small, good things that happened, but generally, it was an awful week, beginning with the Supreme Court’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor on allowing ‘opt-outs’ of lessons that parents don’t like (ostensibly for religious reasons). We’ll see next week what the passage of the ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ will do to federal library funding. Meanwhile, the first several articles linked and quoted here are about the Mahmoud v. Taylor decision. Overviews, facts, and opinions. It’s a very big deal because it can lead to a sort of a la carte education in public schools and, being impossible for a teacher to manage, could also lead to the cancellation of any lessons that anyone might object to for religious reasons.
Mahmoud v. Taylor
Justices Let Parents Opt Children Out of Classes With L.G.B.T.Q. Storybooks from the NYTimes (gift link)
Maryland parents have a religious right to withdraw their children from classes on days that stories with gay and transgender themes are discussed, the court ruled.
Parents with religious objections to storybooks with L.G.B.T.Q. themes may withdraw their children from public schools when the books are discussed, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday.
Ruling in a case brought by Maryland parents who objected to books with gay and transgender characters, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. closely analyzed the messages the books conveyed, reproducing color images from them in an appendix to his opinion, and noted that they were written for young readers.
But the logic of Justice Alito’s majority opinion in the 6-to-3 decision seemed to sweep quite broadly, allowing parents with religious objections to demand that their children not be instructed about gay and transgender themes but also about many other topics.
Indeed, some legal scholars said the ruling would have broad consequences for the ability of public schools to manage their curriculums. In earlier cases, parents unsuccessfully challenged storybooks about wizards and giants along with course materials on yoga, evolution and women working outside the home. Under Justice Alito’s reasoning, legal experts said, those lawsuits might now succeed.
What to know about the US Supreme Court's ruling on public school lessons using LGBTQ books from ABC News
In Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion — joined by the rest of the court's conservatives — he wrote that the lack of an “opt-out” for parents places an unconstitutional burden on their rights to religious freedom.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent for the three liberal justices that public schools expose children to different views in a multicultural society.
“That experience is critical to our Nation's civic vitality,” she wrote. “Yet it will become a mere memory if children must be insulated from exposure to ideas and concepts that may conflict with their parents’ religious beliefs."
‘Accelerated censorship’: advocates criticize US supreme court ruling on LGBTQ+ books from The Guardian
“LGBTQ-relevant books are just the beginning in accelerated censorship,” Sabrina Baêta, a senior member of PEN America, told the Guardian. “What’s to stop schools from backing away from any books that may be offensive? We have already seen other topics like Black history disappear as districts try to avoid anything potentially controversial.”
PEN America highlighted in a recent report that teachers may be more likely to overlook topics that require parental consent, thereby brushing over crucial books and subjects in classrooms that promote diverse identities and learning.
In administrative terms, the court’s ruling also poses problems for teachers and educators. Rather than focusing on lessons at hand, they will have to grapple with what is or isn’t appropriate on religious grounds. And while anything with LGBTQ+ themes will constitute a student being able to leave the classroom, it creates a grey zone for topics like science and history, where certain lessons – such as about reproduction – could be seen as now potentially inappropriate.
This article from the LA Times gives a brief description of each of the nine books involved in the case. I’ve mentioned before that I was sorry to see this particular case before the court (It seems to me it might have been worked out otherwise). I’m mostly worried about further repercussions down the line. (If a Christian Nationalist objects to a book with a Black hero for religious reasons, is that an ‘opt out?’ If there’s a book with a single, never married parent, is that an opt out? Where does ‘we don’t believe that should be shown in a positive light’ end?)
The 9 LGBTQ+ children’s books targeted in high court ruling upending education policy
I Wrote One Of The Books At The Center Of SCOTUS' Scary Ruling. Here's What They Don't Want You To See. From HuffPost
On Friday, the Supreme Court announced their decision. As predicted, they not only sided with the parents, but the majority opinion left the door wide open for opt-outs to be used in other destructive ways against public education.
Here’s what that means: Religious parents can, for any reason at all, opt their child out of any book being read in the classroom that expresses a viewpoint that the parent believes undermines the religious teachings they’re trying to impart onto their child.
The logistical nightmare that this will create for schools, teachers and classrooms is hard to overstate. Every book in the curriculum could need an opt-out form. Teachers will have to keep track of which books each child is allowed to read by their parents. The students who cannot be in the classroom while the book is being read or taught will need somewhere safe to go, without losing instructional time.
The end result, we fear, is that schools will simply stop assigning or including books that are even potentially controversial. The books in classroom shelves, which have gotten progressively more diverse and inclusive, will go back to being books that reflect a majority experience: white, cis, straight and Christian, either by default or explicitly.
But that’s not all this decision could do.
As Justice Sotomayor said in her dissent: “Nor is the Court’s reasoning seemingly limited to reading material. Interactions with teachers and students could presumably involve implicit ‘normative’ messages that parents may find ‘contrary to the religious principles’ they wish to impart to their children and therefore ‘hostile’ to their religious beliefs. A female teacher displaying a wedding photo with her wife; a student’s presentation on her family tree featuring LGBTQ parents or siblings; or an art display with the phrase ‘Love Is Love’ all could ’positively reinforc[e]” messages that parents disapprove on religious grounds. Would that be sufficient to trigger strict scrutiny if a school fails to provide advance notice and the opportunity to opt out of any such exposure? The majority offers no principled basis easily to distinguish those cases from this one.”
It’s hard not to feel a chill down your back when you imagine all of the possibilities that could come out of this case. In the oral arguments, Justice Sotomayor brought up that parents have challenged books in which women accomplish things outside of the home. Imagine not being able to read about female astronauts or scientists because another parent in the classroom’s religious beliefs say that women shouldn’t have jobs outside of the home.
If you’d like to read a snarky takedown of Samuel Alito, here it is. Of course, it’s more than that. This is sort of related to the decision to allow opt-outs.
Progressive parents in Oklahoma offer blueprint to mess with MAGA censorship from Salon
However, mischief can cut in multiple directions, as parents in Oklahoma have figured out. As Judd Legum of Popular Information reported last month, progressives in the state are using a broad “opt-out” provision to fight back against efforts to use public schools to push right-wing propaganda on students. The Donald Trump-worshipping state superintendent, Ryan Walters, has imposed a social studies curriculum teaching outright lies, such as “discrepancies” in the 2020 election and that the U.S. was founded as a “Christian” nation. The state also passed a law in 2024 giving any parent the right to withdraw a child from any lesson they deem “harmful.”
The legislation was intended to give right-wing parents the ability to disrupt lessons in science, history or other subjects that make Christian nationalists grumpy. But a group called We’re Oklahoma Education (WOKE) is encouraging parents to use it to pull kids from classes teaching these false views of history or other lessons corrupted by right-wing propaganda. Another group of Oklahomans is also suing to block the new curriculum on the grounds of religious freedom. The lead plaintiff, Rev. Dr. Mitch Randall, explained his views: “As a Christian, I object to Oklahoma’s new social studies standards that require teachers to deceive students by presenting inaccurate information as fact.”
Carla Hayden, former Librarian of Congress, speaks on her dismissal, the future of libraries at Philadelphia event From WHYY (PBS)
Hayden, both the first woman and first Black person to head the Library of Congress, was fired by President Donald Trump in May. This is a bit of what she has to say. (Still hopeful about libraries.)
Good News
Illinois
State of Illinois award $20 million in grants to benefit Illinois libraries From WSIU (Southern Illinois University)
The Illinois Secretary of State’s office is awarding nearly $20 million in grant funding to hundreds of libraries across the state.
Secretary of State and State Librarian Alexi Giannoulias says 639 public libraries statewide will receive nearly $18 million in per-capita grants. Funding amounts were calculated according to a statutory formula based on the population of each community.
Vermont
New Vermont laws for July 1 affect library books, bake sales and job ads from Vermont Public (BBC World Service)
Public libraries and school libraries must adopt selection policies for books and other materials that are consistent with the First Amendment, the federal Civil Rights Act and state anti-discrimination laws. The policies must also “reflect Vermont’s diverse people and history, including diversity of race, ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation,” according to the law,passed in 2024.
Supporters of the legislation hope the policies will act as a bulwark against politically-motivated book bans, which have become increasingly common across the country.
Rhode Island
Gov. McKee signs Freedom to Read Act into law from the Rhode Island Current
Rhode Island has joined at least eight other blue states that have taken steps against library censorship after Gov. Dan McKee signed the Freedom to Read Act into law Wednesday.
The legislation introduced by Sen. Mark McKenney, a Warwick Democrat, and Rep. David Morales, a Providence Democrat, protects libraries and their patrons from book-banning efforts and affirms the free speech rights of authors, publishers and readers in the state.
Large Municipal Libraries create reading space for all
Large Public Libraries Give Young Adults Across U.S. Access to Banned Books from EdSurge
Since 2022, thousands of eligible young adults have registered for a little-known program called Books Unbanned, which Brooklyn Public Library in New York created that year to counter efforts to restrict access to certain books. …
The breadth of access differs among libraries. While Seattle Public Library’s Books Unbanned e-card gives young adults up to age 26 access to its entire OverDrive collection and is open to readers throughout the U.S., the LA County Library Books Unbanned program is limited to teens 13 to 18, and is available only to residents of California.
Boston Public Library and San Diego Public Library took a more refined approach to their Books Unbanned programs. Both offer access to young adults who register throughout the U.S., but their collections are limited to frequently challenged or banned titles.
Each of the participating libraries encourage young adults to apply for as many banned book e-cards as they’re eligible for to make use of as many collections as possible.