Kelly is a former librarian and a long-time blogger at STACKED. She’s the editor/author of (DON’T) CALL ME CRAZY: 33 VOICES START THE CONVERSATION ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH and the editor/author of HERE WE ARE: FEMINISM FOR THE REAL WORLD. Her next book, BODY TALK, will publish in Fall 2020. Follow her on Instagram @heykellyjensen.

View All posts by Kelly Jensen

Rutherford County Library System (RCLS) in Tennessee have made several headlines during this wave of book censorship. They voted to ban all trans books for minors in the library earlier this year, and the board of the Lineburgh Public Library–one of their branches–voted to remove “transgenderism” books just weeks before the decision was made by the county’s board. Months after passing their anti-trans book policy, the RCLS decided to overturn it. That decision wasn’t out of a change of heart but rather, fear of litigation.

Rutherford County includes the city of Murfreesboro, which passed an anti-LGBTQ+ law in 2023 and later repealed, paying a steep fee following a lawsuit settlement. It is also home to Rutherford County Schools, which have been among the biggest book banners in the state. The ACLU and PEN America filed a lawsuit in the school district over their censorship of materials earlier this year.

Now, the RCLS board is shutting down several of its library branches to “meet new reporting requirements from the TN State Secretary’s Office.” The vaguely worded post offers little insight into what these reporting requirements are, and the post does not explain why two branches of the library system need to shut down for several days in order to meet them.

The answer is likely that this will be a mass book banning without public oversight.

Literary Activism

News you can use plus tips and tools for the fight against censorship and other bookish activism!

Tennessee has been actively updating their statewide library policies since the passage of their 2022 Age-Appropriate Materials Act. In 2024, the law was amended to add even more categories of books deemed illegal with the state. These include books containing nudity, sexual excitement, sexual conduct, or excess violence; it also includes books appealing to “prurient interests,” including LGBTQ+ material.

Both of these laws apply to public school libraries, but Tennessee has also updated their public library standards and the language within it mirrors that of the school-based law. This happened some time in 2023 and is likely related to a suite of legislation related to codifying biological sex as the only accepted identity in the state (another library system in Tennessee, Sumner County–also deeply involved in censorship of materials–recently failed to pass an anti-trans book policy for the fourth time. Their proposal references Act 2023, PC, TCA 4-21-102, and TCA 10-3-10 as justification; see page 9 of the .pdf). It’s also likely blatant over-application of the law.

The 2025 Tennessee Standards for Public Libraries in the Regional System states the following on page 25:

Collection Development Policy (includes a Materials Reconsideration policy)
Minimum Requirements

1. All materials are selected by the local public library in accordance with the individual public library’s full Collection Development Policy;
2. The public library’s Collection Development Policy is approved by the public library’s Board of Trustees (or equivalent governing body) at least annually;
3. All books selected for purchase by the individual public library, through the Regional Library System or otherwise, are reviewed by the public library’s director before purchase, with the library director then sharing a list or lists of newly purchased materials with the public library’s Board of Trustees (or equivalent governing body);
4. No funds received are used to purchase, nor will the library otherwise acquire, material that constitutes “child pornography,” is “pornographic for minors,” or is “obscene;”
5. Books and materials that contain sexual themes or content are reviewed by the public library independently for age-appropriateness and cataloged accordingly – even if this overrides the age appropriateness recommended by the publisher;
6. Request for Reconsideration of Materials: The library has a written, publicly accessible library materials challenge policy that (a) defines which parties may dispute or challenge the library’s age-appropriate designation on materials, with such definition, at a minimum, including a parent or guardian of a minor within the library district, (b) defines the process by which a materials challenge can be initiated, and (c) provides for the results of any such dispute or challenge to be disclosed in the public library’s official Board of Trustee minutes.

Starting in September of this year, all public libraries in the state began to receive letters from Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett. He emphasized that for libraries to receive their funding from the state, they needed to comply with all state and local laws.

The letter specifically cites Trump’s “Defending Women from Gender Ideology,” and states that all libraries needed to review their juvenile materials to ensure they are in compliance with Tennessee’s age-appropriateness law, all federal laws, and all federal executive orders (which are not legally binding and do not override the Constitution).

But why the urgency to shut down the library to review materials? It could be related to a second letter that the Secretary of State sent out in late October, demanding the removal of any books out of compliance of the law within 60 days. The RCLS board chair, the director of the RCLS, and the branch manager of the Linebaugh Public Library received this:

Like we saw happen similarly this summer in Florida, the Tennessee Secretary of State is attempting to wield power in order to drive libraries into compliance with standards that are not legally binding and that indeed are intended to led to mass bannings. Unlike in Florida, though, where schools complied out of fear, in Rutherford, at least, such demands to remove LGBTQ+ materials from the library aligns with the board’s long-term goals. It’s a convenient means of subverting their fears of litigation, which drove them to change their anti-trans book policy earlier this summer. If the directive is from the state, then they “have to” comply.

The Tennessee Secretary of State is granting permission slips to public library boards to ban away. It’s done under the guise of threatening them for noncompliance, but as we know, Rutherford and other systems in the state, including Sumner County, have been looking for the means by which to remove as many LGBTQ+ books from the library as possible.

Rutherford County Library System hired a new library director in June, and now, the director has been put in the position of responding to inquiries from residents wondering why the library is closing down two branches to “review” materials. The new director hails from York County Libraries in South Carolina, which itself has been subject to mass blanket book bans since October of last year.

There is an active anti-censorship group in Rutherford. They were among the first to indicate concerns over potential new changes to the library’s collection policy in late October, just before this closure was announced. Rutherford County Library Alliance will likely begin to organize a response and action in the coming days and will be the first to share updates about the library’s closures. Something library advocates can do in addition to following their lead is keep an eye on any and all LGBTQ+ (and specifically trans-related) books available in the RCLS system. Chances are better than good that titles which have been pulled from school districts statewide will be among the first targets in this potential purge. If you’re local and are able, head into the library this week to borrow any and all titles you think may be at risk of “disappearing” from shelves.

The post Rutherford County Library System (TN) Temporarily Shuts Down to Ban Books appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Kelly is a former librarian and a long-time blogger at STACKED. She’s the editor/author of (DON’T) CALL ME CRAZY: 33 VOICES START THE CONVERSATION ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH and the editor/author of HERE WE ARE: FEMINISM FOR THE REAL WORLD. Her next book, BODY TALK, will publish in Fall 2020. Follow her on Instagram @heykellyjensen.

View All posts by Kelly Jensen

In another blow to the First Amendment Rights of library users, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida ruled that the Escambia County school board did not violate student or author rights when it pulled And Tango Makes Three from school library shelves. This is the second ruling in a matter of months to put the approved content of public library and public school library materials into the hands of government officials.

It is also a ruling that contradicts one made in the U.S. Middle District Court of Florida in mid-August, where the judge found a Florida law used to remove books from public schools was “overbroad and unconstitutional.”

Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson, the creators of And Tango Makes Three, alongside an elementary school student in the district, filed the lawsuit against Escambia County school board in September 2023. It alleged that the district removed the nonfiction picture book about a pair of penguins at the Central Park Zoo who raised an egg together was removed by the board because it disagreed with their viewpoint. They argued the decision infringed on their free speech rights.

Escambia officials claimed that library collections were government speech. They could curate the collection as they wished and authors did not have a right to have their materials included.

Judge Allen Winsor oversaw the case in the District Court. But rather than lean on the arguments presented by Escambia, he went with a different approach. First, Winsor argued, school libraries are not a public forum for expressing opinions. In that, the authors didn’t have the right to have their books included. Second, Winsor stated that the book being removed from the school library didn’t hinder the student plaintiff’s ability to get the book. He could “order it online, buy it at a bookstore, or borrow it from a friend.” This is a common argument made by the individuals and groups who have been pursuing book bans in public schools and libraries since the unprecedented rise in book censorship began in 2021.

Literary Activism

News you can use plus tips and tools for the fight against censorship and other bookish activism!

The New York Times’s coverage on the case points out that Winsor did not address the issue of “government speech.” Instead, Judge Winsor leaned on the First Amendment argument.

From the ruling:

The good news is I need not decide the difficult government-speech issue to resolve the case. If book curation is government speech, the board wins on the merits because the First Amendment would not reach its speech. And even if book curation is not government speech, the board still wins on the merits: when the government decides which books to choose, it is not creating a forum for others to speak, and it is not otherwise implicating Plaintiffs’ First Amendment Rights. Either way, the First Amendment offers Plaintiffs no protection, and the board is entitled to summary judgment.

[…]

[T]here is no principled reason to distinguish book removals from decisions rejecting additions.

And Tango Makes Three was removed from Escambia Schools following a single parent complaint. After multiple review committees elected to keep the book on shelves, the parent appealed the decision to the board, who pulled it. In other words, one complaint from the community was enough to remove the book from an entire school district. Even by Escambia County’s current selection policy, removal of And Tango Makes Three–again, a work of nonfiction–would not be appropriate.

Parnell et al. vs. School Board of Escambia County is the second case this year to directly address the First Amendment rights as they relate to patron access in public libraries. The first came from the Fifth Circuit Court in late May, which argued that the First Amendment cannot be used to challenge book removals in three U.S. states. Library books are government speech and thus, not subject to the Free Speech clause–in other words, Little vs. Llano County provides fertile ground for removing materials from shelves based entirely on political motivation and sets up ample opportunity for the development of biased library collections paid for by taxpayer dollars. The ruling currently applies to Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, but Judge Winsor pulled liberally from that case in making his decision in Parnell.

At least one of the most prolific book banners in the country, Bruce Friedman, celebrated the judge’s decision. He told Clay County, Florida, schools in a message on X that he’d be seeking to get And Tango Makes Three removed from the district soon.

This is one of two lawsuits that have been filed against Escambia County school board in relation to their mass book bannings. PEN America, Penguin Random House, and a group of authors joined with parents and students in Escambia County, Florida, to file a lawsuit against the school board in May 2023. That case is still moving through the court system.

Parnell and Richardson have filed numerous lawsuits in relation to the banning of And Tango Makes Three, which celebrated its 20th publication anniversary this year. They settled one against Florida’s Nassau County School District, wherein the board not only had to put their book and several others inappropriately removed back on school shelves, but the district also had to acknowledge their decision had no basis.

There are also a lot of unanswered questions as a result of this ruling. Where and how does this square with Judge Mendoza’s from August, wherein the law Florida instituted to remove books was deemed unconstitutional? Where and how does this decision contradict the ruling in 1982’s Island Trees vs. Pico, which held that public school libraries are places for voluntary inquiry and dissemination of information and ideas? If school and public libraries aren’t required to meet the diverse needs and interests of their communities, then what purpose do they even serve?

The future of whether or not public library materials constitute government speech remains to be seen. The plaintiffs in Parnell can appeal the decision, and the decision rendered in Little vs. Llano County from earlier this year is eligible for appeal to the Supreme Court.

The post Another Judge Chips Away at Library Patron First Amendment Rights appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Kelly is a former librarian and a long-time blogger at STACKED. She’s the editor/author of (DON’T) CALL ME CRAZY: 33 VOICES START THE CONVERSATION ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH and the editor/author of HERE WE ARE: FEMINISM FOR THE REAL WORLD. Her next book, BODY TALK, will publish in Fall 2020. Follow her on Instagram @heykellyjensen.

View All posts by Kelly Jensen

Taking a page from a library system to its west, the York County Library in South Carolina is preparing to update their collection policies and ban trans and gender themed books from children’s and teen collections. The policy, proposed June 9 during the library board’s policy committee meeting, copies and pastes the policy imposed by Greenville Public Libraries.

York County Library would not outright ban books for young readers on topics related to gender and trans people. They would, however, make them difficult to access by restricting their location to the adult collections. This systematic and intentional barrier is still a form of censorship, and it blatantly discriminates against queer, trans, and gender nonconforming people.

Such policies are the antithesis of a free and welcoming public library, funded and accessible to all within a community.

Proposed updates to the teen policy read as follows:

Proposed updated to the children’s policy read as follows:

Literary Activism

News you can use plus tips and tools for the fight against censorship and other bookish activism!

Dennis Getter, chair of the library board’s policy committee, thought that the discriminatory policy in Greenville made for an excellent template for York County, calling it “wonderful.” He also suggested during the meeting that the library consider implementing Utah Parents United/Mary in the Library/No Left Turn for Education’s RatedBooks ratings for materials. The ratings system is not one created, maintained, nor implemented by professional library workers or educators but instead, by members of the “parental rights” movement. It undermines the work, knowledge, and expertise of the very professional librarians employed by York County.

Greenville County Libraries were sued in late March by four parents of minors, supported by both the South Carolina chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and the federal American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) over their discriminatory policy. Another library in South Carolina, Pickens Public Library, attempted to pass a similar anti-trans and anti-gender policy for its collections accessible to those under the age of 18 in late March as well. They were warned by the ACLU ahead of their vote that such a policy would put them at risk for a similar lawsuit. Leaders for Pickens County Public Library elected not to pursue the policy.

York County Library knows what’s being proposed is dangerous. They were told this in May 2023–more than two years ago–when a representative from South Carolina’s ACLU spoke at a board meeting during public comment.

“Book banners are copying and pasting foolish ideas from one county to the next, but libraries are still for everyone, and so is the Constitution,” said Paul Bowers, Communications Director of the ACLU of South Carolina. “We already informed Greenville County via a federal lawsuit that identically worded policies discriminating against LGBTQ library patrons are discriminatory and unconstitutional. Now some leaders in York County want to go down the same road. We strongly encourage them to reconsider.”

Last year, York County Library made headlines for a proposal that would have ended purchasing materials for the collection published for readers under the age of 18. It came as a response to the state budget proviso, which required that public libraries ensure none of their youth materials contained “sexual content.” What unraveled was a mess of board policies, including no record keeping of meetings that left the community in the dark about their library.

Changes to the York County Library Board over the last few years have included shrinking the number of representatives who could be appointed. Six of the seven board members are affiliated with York County’s republican party.

“We are deeply disappointed by the YCL Policy Committee’s recent discussion to relocate age-appropriate diverse and inclusive books from the children and young adult sections. 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,” said Support York County Libraries, a grassroots local group working to push back against attacks on intellectual freedom in the library. “Decisions about how books are shelved should be made by trained, professional librarians—not politicians or policy committees. Librarians have the expertise to curate collections that serve the educational and developmental needs of all readers.”

The proposed changes to the York County Library collection policy put them firmly in the position of potential litigation, especially as their language is copied and pasted from Greenville’s. It makes clear that the goal of the library isn’t to serve the whole community, either. The goal is to lean into partisan politics at the expense of all young people living in the community–with LGBTQ+ young people being told explicitly that they do not belong.

“This proposal is not only discriminatory, but it also puts our county at serious legal and financial risk. We urge the board to uphold the values of inclusion, intellectual freedom, and fiscal responsibility by rejecting this harmful and short-sighted suggestion,” Support York County Libraries added.

Per The Herald, costs for any litigation arising from such a proposal would come from York County Library’s insurance, meaning it would be footed by taxpayers in one way or another.

Support York County Libraries has put together a petition demanding that the board reject this new policy that anyone can sign. You can follow their work and get involved through their website.

The York County Library policy committee will meet again this coming Tuesday, June 24. It will be at 1 p.m. at the Lake Wylie branch. Consider reaching out to the York County Board via email and keeping an eye on their webpage for updates on meeting times and locations.

The post York County Library (SC) Proposes Restrictions on Trans, Gender Books for Those Under 18 appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Kelly is a former librarian and a long-time blogger at STACKED. She’s the editor/author of (DON’T) CALL ME CRAZY: 33 VOICES START THE CONVERSATION ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH and the editor/author of HERE WE ARE: FEMINISM FOR THE REAL WORLD. Her next book, BODY TALK, will publish in Fall 2020. Follow her on Instagram @heykellyjensen.

View All posts by Kelly Jensen

On Thursday, March 20, the Alabama Public Library Service Board of Trustees (APLS) voted to defund the Fairhope Public Library (FPL). APLS Chairman John Wahl stated that the library was violating state policies related to protecting children from “inappropriate” material in the library.

Wahl, who was appointed Chair of the APLS in September 2024, is also the current chairman of the Alabama Republican Party. One of the Republican Party’s goals under Alabama Governor Kay Ivey over the last several years has been targeting library funding.

In 2024, Alabama updated its laws and administrative codes, permitting the APLS to withhold funds from libraries that do not have policies which remove or restrict “sexually explicit or other material deemed inappropriate” for minors. Like other states passing such bills, there is no clear definition of “sexually explicit” or “inappropriate.” This is intentional–it allows for interpretation at the will of whoever is in charge. It also undermines the prevailing standard for obscenity as defined by the Miller Test.

The Fairhope Public Library is the first public library in Alabama to lose their funding as a result of these new policies. While it has earned this unfortunate distinction, Fairhope is far from the first library to see local book censors champion defunding. A similar unsuccessful proposal was made for Athens Limestone Public Library in May last year.

Though most members of the APLS voted in favor of defunding the library at the meeting, there was one notable exception. Ron Snider, who represents the Fairhope district on the board, said the decision was highly inappropriate. His vote would echo what other leaders in the Fairhope community would say in the coming days: the APLS’s decision and demands do not reflect the will of the people.

Literary Activism Newsletter

News you can use plus tips and tools for the fight against censorship and other bookish activism!

Thank you for signing up! Keep an eye on your inbox.

APLS did not name the books it considers inappropriate that are available in the FPL collection. Several could be readily identified, though, based on public complaints to the APLS, including Sold by Patricia McCormick, Grown by Tiffany D. Jackson, and Tricks by Ellen Hopkins. All three books are written for teens and available in FPL’s teen section. These books are not the same ones challenged in the library back in April 2024 from a list compiled by Brian Dasinger, a member of the Baldwin County Conservative Coalition. Dasinger has been a staple at FPL board meetings as an advocate of banning books with topics he deems “inappropriate” for minors. The vast majority, as is the case in nearly every book ban situation nationwide, are by or about people of color and LGBTQ+ people.

Wahl noted that state law requires removal of the books out of youth areas in order to receive funding, insisting that such policy does not amount to book banning. These claims mirror those made by champions of book banning throughout the state of Alabama, including Clean Up Alabama and several local Moms For Liberty chapters.

Whether or not such a policy to move books falls under “banning” doesn’t matter. Relocating materials from where they belong in a library is book censorship by any and all definitions and goes against the ethical practices of libraries. All of this plays into the ongoing and pointless arguments made by book banners that what their goals are are simply to “curate” collections. What banners claim was limited to the public schools has clearly been anything but–the plan all along has been to re-define language and intent in order to take over public institutions.

On Monday, March 24, the Fairhope City Council met for the first time since the news of the APLS’s plan to defund the local library. Though the City Council has little control over the operations of FPL, they are the library’s primary funding source. All the Fairhope City Council members in attendance affirmed their support of the library and extended empathy to the library staff for the undue stress they are experiencing.

Wahl was in communication with Fairhope’s mayor, Sherry Sullivan, who is confident that the APLS and the library can find a compromise. But per Wahl’s own doubling down on the decision, that won’t happen until the books are relocated.

“We want to make it absolutely clear—non-compliance with APLS code is not an option. There are no gray areas, loopholes, or exceptions when it comes to keeping sexually explicit materials out of children’s sections,” he said in a statement issued Monday. “These are common-sense requirements that prevent innocent children from accidentally stumbling across sexually explicit material without their parents’ consent. Any library that refuses to move these books to the adult section will not receive state funding. Period.”

The City Council contributed $1.2 million to the Fairhope Public Library budget last year. The APLS cuts would amount to about $42,000–an amount that local pro-library, anti-book censorship advocates with Read Freely Alabama are hoping to raise to help keep the library open. The group has been on the ground defending Fairhope Public Library from attacks from the beginning. In four days, they’ve already come close to meeting their fundraising goal, bringing in nearly $39,000 in donations.

That would help keep the library open at the same service level it is now for at least 18 months.

Fairhope Public Library has been a book censorship hotspot during this era of unprecedented attacks on democratic institutions like public libraries. Things ramped up in September 2023, when members of the group Faith, Family, Freedom Coalition of Baldwin County began to show up to City Council meetings with complaints over the books available on the library’s shelves. These complaints were paired with calls to withhold funding until said titles were removed.

By October 2024, the library implemented a new policy that requires parental permission for anyone under 18 to borrow books from certain areas of the library. But this move wasn’t enough for the far-right groups who are obsessed with gender and sexuality. The Baldwin County chapter of Moms For Liberty took aim at the library’s board, and alongside Clean Up Alabama, have pushed to see the board chair fired for not moving books they have deemed “inappropriate.” Despite those complaints, three members of the library’s board who have worked hard to ensure equitable access to books were reappointed earlier this year. Clean Up Alabama then called for the City Council to withhold $225,000 in funding to the library until the books were removed.

It is very likely that because these far-right special interest groups did not get their way that they saw their opportunity by going straight to the APLS. This has been a pattern happening nationwide–when individuals don’t get their way in terms of banning materials locally, they go up the chain as far as they can. This is why Samuels Public Library in Virginia is still under attack several years on–the handful of church members who didn’t get their way with the library board have managed to get the county to create its own governing board in order to exert power–and it’s why parents like Elizabeth Szalai, who challenged dozens of books without success in Beaufort County Schools (SC) has now simply taken her complaints to the South Carolina Department of Education.

The Fairhope Public Library board won’t meet again until April 21, leaving questions about what will or won’t happen to the library and its funding. One thing is clear though, and that’s that the vast majority of the people in Fairhope, as well as its own leadership at the city and institutional level, do not agree with the decisions being made on their behalf by APLS.

The post Alabama Public Library Service Defunds Fairhope Public Library; City Council Will Not Follow Suit appeared first on Our Story Insight.