Home Minnesota Educator The rise of book bans throughout the U.S. and Minnesota’s legislative response
“Eachofthese rulings has shown that while book bans have become increasingly attractivetosome school board members and lawmakers, courts have been skepticaloftheir constitutionality.”
Accordingtothe American Library Association, 2023 saw the greatest numberofattempted book bans in public libraries and schools in the United States since the ALA began keeping records 20 years ago. The ALAdocumented 4,240 unique book titles that were either removed or restricted beyond the age intended by the publisher,a92 percent increase over the previous year. The ALA also noted that 47 percentofbooks banned or challenged feature the voicesofLGBTQ+ people and peopleofcolor.
While individuals and organizations challenging large numbersofbooks atatime drove the 2023 surge in book bans, state legislatures and school boards have also playedasignificant role. As discussed below, mostofthese efforts have been met with litigation.
Florida, Iowa, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas and Utah are among the statestohave enacted content-based restrictions on books in public schools. In perhaps the most well-known example, Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay or Trans” law, passed in 2022, prohibits “classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity” for students in kindergarten through third grade. The law prompted widespread confusion and concern from educators, librarians and civil rights groups that previously approved children’s books featuring LGBTQ+ characters could violate the new law. Publishers and civil rights groups sued the state, andarecent settlement significantly narrowed the lawtomake clear that the lawdoes not prohibitreferencestoLGBTQ+ families in books,does not prohibitanti-bullying curriculum, anddoes not applytoschool libraries.
In 2023, Iowapassedalaw similartoFlorida’s but extendingtograde six, and explicitly prohibiting any books containing referencetosex acts other than those in the Bible in all public schools for students grades K-12. The law prompted the removalofhundredsofbooks from school libraries and classrooms and was also challenged in court. Penguin Books, several well-known authors, and the IowaState Education Association are among plaintiffs suing the state. In December 2023,adistrict court judge temporarily blocked both provisionsofthe law, finding that they were unconstitutionally vague and overbroad in violationofthe First Amendment. The court also agreed with the plaintiffs that many age-appropriate and celebrated literary works include content that would arguably violate the law. The caseisnow onappeal.
In August 2023, the Clyde-Savannah School District in upstate New York removed five books from the school library afteraminister with no children in the district challenged them. After New York State United Teachers (NYSUT) challenged that action with the state commissionerofeducation, the district rescinded its ban, prompting the minister andalocal Moms for Liberty chaptertoappeal the school board’s decisiontothe commissioner. Inawritten opinion issued just last month, the state commissioner rejected the book challenge, finding that the objections were not limitedtoconcerns about their age appropriateness, but rather motivated by disagreements with the authors’ personal and political views. The commissioner relied heavily on BoardofEduc., Island Trees UFSD No. 26 v. Pico,a1982 decision from the U.S. Supreme Court holding that local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in thosebooks.
A 40-year-old court decision stemming from an attempted film ban in the Forest Lake School Districtisfrequently being cited in current litigation. In Pratt v. ISD No. 831, Forest Lake (1982), three students sued the district over its efforttopreventateacher from showing the movie “the Lottery” becauseofpolitical and religious themes parents and board members found offensive. The U.S. CourtofAppeals Eighth Circuitheld that the school board’s action, although purportedly duetographic violence in the film, was motivated primarily by ideological concerns. The court reasoned, “Whatisat stakeisthe righttoreceive information andtobe exposedtocontroversial ideas-afundamental First Amendment right. If these films can be banned by those opposedtotheir ideological theme, thenaprecedentisset for the removalofany such work.”
Eachofthese rulings has shown that while book bans have become increasingly attractivetosome school board members and lawmakers, courts have been skepticaloftheir constitutionality. In additiontoopposition from courts,anumberofstates are beginningtointervenetoprohibitschool districts and libraries from banning books based on the book’s viewpoint or ideology. Illinois, Washington and Maryland have all recently passed “FreedomtoRead” laws—which take aim at book bans—and similar bills have been introduced California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island andVermont.
Asofthe timeofthisprinting, Minnesota’s proposed prohibition on book bans has been included in both the house and senate education omnibus bills— meaningit isvery likelytobecome law thisyear. The bill states thatapublic library, including libraries and mediacenters within public schools, “must not ban, remove, or otherwise restrict accessto abook or other material based solely on its viewpoint or the message, ideas or opinionsitconveys.” The proposed lawdoes not prohibitpublic libraries from removing or restricting books over “legitimate pedagogical concerns, including but not limitedtothe appropriatenessofpotentially sensitive topics for the library’s intended audience….” among other reasons. Finally, the law requires all librariestoadoptapolicy with procedures for selecting books, reviewing challenges and reconsidering materials. Echoing concernsofmany members about the riseofbook bans or book ban efforts, Education Minnesotahas supported thislegislation.
Asanoteofcaution, even with legislation prohibiting book bans, K-12 educatorsdonot haveaFirst Amendment righttoselect classroom content without district oversight. For classroom instruction, educators will still needtowork through the curriculum review process set by their district’s or charter school’s advisory committee and site team, as required by state law. Nevertheless,ifpassed, Minnesota’s prohibition on book bans will makeitmuch more difficult for community or school board memberstoban certain books from school libraries based on disagreement with the ideas expressed within them.
This Legal Briefs column, written by Education Minnesota attorneys, is one of an occasional series on legal developments that affect educators.
