SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
libraries
Alabama House Passes Bill That Could Be 'Used to Arrest Librarians'
"I feel like this is a violation of the First Amendment, and it's easily going to be abused," one Democratic lawmaker said.
Apr 26, 2024
The Alabama House of Representatives voted 72-28 on Thursday in favor of a bill that would apply the state's criminal obscenity laws to public libraries, public school libraries, and the people who work there.
Critics, including the Alabama Library Association, have warned that the bill could see librarians jailed and argued that it violates the First Amendment.
"This is a pig," Rep. Chris England (D-70), said during the debate, as AL.com reported. "It is a bad bill, and when you attempt to take what is normally non-criminal conduct and make it criminal, you bend yourself into ways that potentially not only violate the Constitution but potentially subject somebody to an illegal arrest with no due process."
"Why are they coming into libraries or thinking that they can come in and run the place better than us as professionals?"
House Bill 385 would allow anyone to write a letter to a school district superintendent or head librarian claiming a book is obscene. The Montgomery Advertiser explained further:
The library would be required to remove the materials within seven days of receiving the required written notice. Failure to remove said materials would result in a Class C misdemeanor upon the first offense, a Class B misdemeanor upon the second offense, and a Class A misdemeanor after the third and beyond. They may challenge the claim during the seven-day period.
In Alabama, a Class C misdemeanor carries a maximum sentence of three months in jail and fee of $500. The maximum sentence for a Class B misdemeanor is six months of jail time and a $3,000 fee, while a Class A misdemeanor carries a maximum sentence of one year in jail and a $6,000 fee.
The bill also adds to the definition of the "sexual conduct" minors must be protected from to include "any sexual or gender-oriented material that knowingly exposes minors to persons who are dressed in sexually revealing, exaggerated, or provocative clothing or costumes, or are stripping, or engaged in lewd or lascivious dancing, presentations, or activities in K-12 public schools, public libraries, and other public places where minors are expected and are known to be present without parental consent."
During the debate, England warned, "This process will be manipulated and used to arrest librarians that you don't like, and not because they did anything criminal. It's because you disagree with them," as The Associated Press reported.
Rep. Mary Moore (D-59) warned that the description of sexual conduct was loose enough that it could apply to students dressed up for prom, according to AL.com.
"Some of them would be under the jail because of this," Moore said.
Rep. Neil Rafferty (D-54) also expressed concerns that the language could apply to people in Halloween costumes or wearing summer clothing.
"I feel like this is a violation of the First Amendment, and it's easily going to be abused," he said, according to AP.
Rep. Barbara Drummond (D-103) said the bill was "putting lipstick on a pig," and added that the government "can't legislate morality," and that it would prevent children from "having an open mind," AL.com reported.
The bill comes amid increased politicization of libraries and attempts to ban books, especially in Republican-led states.
In Alabama, the legislature is also considering making $6.6 million in public library funding dependent on whether a library relocates materials deemed inappropriate for children, AL.com reported further. Nationwide, PEN America found that the total number of book bans in schools and libraries during just the first half of the 2023-2024 school year was greater than all the titles banned in 2022-2023, and that number had already jumped by 33% from the school year before.
The bill applying obscenity laws to libraries now heads to the Senate, but Alabama Library Association president Craig Scott told AP the state should expect to lose "lawsuit after lawsuit" if it becomes law.
"Why are they coming into libraries or thinking that they can come in and run the place better than us as professionals?" Scott asked.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Alabama Republicans Try to 'Criminalize Librarians Simply for Doing Their Jobs'
"Not only is this wrong, it's also unconstitutional. You are not protecting children; you are protecting extremists who are trying to dismantle the very foundations of my country."
Apr 03, 2024
The Alabama Library Association and other critics on Wednesday called out the state's Republican policymakers for pushing a new bill that opponents warn will unfairly jail librarians and have a chilling impact on collections.
House Bill 385, introduced Tuesday by state Rep. Arnold Mooney (R-43) and 30 other legislators, says that "under existing law, certain obscenity laws do not apply to public libraries, public school libraries, college libraries, or university libraries, or the employees or agents of any such libraries."
"This bill would provide that these criminal obscenity laws do not apply to college or university libraries or their employees or agents, but do apply to public libraries, public school libraries, and their employees or agents," the legislation continues.
H.B. 385 would also add the following language to the definition of sexual conduct: "Any sexual or gender-oriented material that knowingly exposes minors to persons who are dressed in sexually revealing, exaggerated, or provocative clothing or costumes, or are stripping, or engaged in lewd or lascivious dancing, presentations, or activities in K-12 public schools, public libraries, and other public places where minors are expected and are known to be present without parental consent."
"This bill is government overreach, robs parents of their rights, and would have a chilling effect on free speech by potentially incarcerating librarians because particular books are available, including even the Bible."
Matthew Layne, president of the Alabama Library Association, declared that "the message is clear—don't arrest Alabama librarians and stop turning our libraries into political battlefields. Montgomery politicians are now seeking to criminalize librarians simply for doing their jobs."
"Under H.B. 385, public and school librarians could be penalized or even arrested by prosecutors eager to follow the demands of Alabama Republican Chair John Wahl, an Alabama Public Library Service Board member, who's willing to jail librarians for having books he considers unacceptable," Layne said. "This bill is government overreach, robs parents of their rights, and would have a chilling effect on free speech by potentially incarcerating librarians because particular books are available, including even the Bible."
EveryLibrary, which says it is "the nation's first and only political action committee for libraries," has created a webpage where Alabama residents can send a pre-written message to their state representatives, urging them to oppose H.B. 385.
"I am one of your constituents and I want to know why Alabama lawmakers think jailing librarians and chilling free speech is a winnable argument," the message begins. Under H.B., 385, public and school libraries would be stripped [of] their obscenity exemption as extremists try to penalize them for having LGBTQ-affirming content, claiming sexually explicit material is available to children."
"That is false but unsurprising since Clean Up Alabama and Moms for Liberty signaled this as their master plan from the very beginning," the message continues, noting right-wing groups that have spearheaded national book-banning efforts in recent years.
PEN America found that from July 2021 to June 2023, there were at least 5,894 instances of book bans across 41 states and 247 public school districts. The group said last year that "Florida and Texas have continued to lead the country in number of bans, but the crisis has spread to 41 states."
EveryLibrary's message to Alabama lawmakers points out that a federal judge last year blocked enforcement of a similar Arkansas law criminalizing librarians and booksellers who provide minors with materials deemed "harmful" as the legal challenge moves through the courts.
"Stripping public and school libraries is a brazen attempt to chill free speech and deprive tax-paying American citizens like me of my right to choose reading material for my children, and academic freedom and privacy for minors, who enjoy a measure of First Amendment rights," the message argues. "It also gives the most extremist parents, politicians, and school administrators undue power to restrict my access to information."
"Not only is this wrong, it's also unconstitutional," the message adds. "You are not protecting children; you are protecting extremists who are trying to dismantle the very foundations of my country."
The introduction of H.B. 385 comes as Alabama residents are already outraged by public library policy changes proposed by Republican Gov. Kay Ivey.
As AL.comreported last week: "According to the Alabama Public Library Service, Alabamians had submitted 416 public comments as of Monday, and 399 are opposed to adopting the administrative code changes Ivey proposed after fears of 'inappropriate content' for children sparked a wave of book challenges statewide. The public comment period ends April 29."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Judge Blocks Iowa Book Ban, 'Don't Say LGBTQ' Law
"We deserve to be able to express ourselves safely at school and we deserve to see ourselves in media at school, especially in books," said an eighth grade student who joined one of the lawsuits.
Dec 29, 2023
A U.S. federal judge on Friday blocked key parts of what critics called a "sweeping Iowa law that seeks to silence LGBTQ+ students, erase any recognition of LGBTQ+ people from public schools, and bans books with sexual or LGBTQ+ content."
Judge Stephen Locher determined that none of the plaintiffs in a pair of cases filed against Senate File 496 has standing to challenge the provision requiring school districts to notify parents if a child seeks an accommodation relating to gender identity, including the use of pronouns that does not match registration records.
However, Locher issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of a ban on any book containing "descriptions or visual depictions of a sex act"—except for the Bible—in all public school classrooms and libraries, and a prohibition on "any program, curriculum, test, survey, questionnaire, promotion, or instruction relating to gender identity or sexual orientation" in kindergarten through sixth grade.
"This decision sends a strong message to the state that efforts to ban books based on LGBTQ+ content, or target speech that sends a message of inclusion to Iowa LGBTQ+ students cannot stand."
The law—part of a national wave of GOP-led book bans and other policies targeting LGBTQ+ youth—was passed by the Iowa Legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds this spring. The Associated Pressnoted Friday that it "was set to take effect January 1 but already had resulted in the removal of hundreds of books from Iowa schools."
The two lawsuits against S.F. 496 were filed last month. The Iowa State Education Association, Penguin Random House, and some popular authors partnered for one of the cases. The ACLU of Iowa, Lambda Legal, and the law firm Jenner & Block also sued on behalf of Iowa Safe Schools and several students and their families—including Berry Stevens, an eighth grader from West Des Moines.
"I've known since I was in third grade that I am a part of the LGBTQIA+ community," said Stevens—whose mother, Rev. Brigit Stevens, is also a plaintiff in the case—when the suit was launched in November. "In sixth grade, I first changed my name and started using they/them pronouns because I knew I wasn't a boy or a girl. I'm just a person. This is a concept that a lot of adults have trouble understanding."
The younger Stevens explained that "I am participating in this lawsuit because this new law hurts all kinds of kids and it hurts many of my friends. We deserve to be able to express ourselves safely at school and we deserve to see ourselves in media at school, especially in books. This law is trying to shut us down and make us be quiet and not openly discuss our lives, who we like, or who we truly are."
"I know what it's like to be bullied and harassed because of being in the LGBTQIA+ community. I wish my school would do something to actually prevent bullying before it happens, not just tell kids it's wrong after the fact," they added. "But because of this law, I feel like the school is too worried about getting in trouble with the state if they try to speak out. This law gets in the way of educators trying to make a safer, more inclusive space for all students."
Another plaintiff, high school senior Puck Carlson of Iowa City, said that "like it or not, sex and sexuality are parts of the teenage experience. Refusing to provide adolescents with information about it means they'll seek out their own information—from the Internet, or from others, in ways that are significantly less safe than books reviewed by teachers or librarians."
"Removing books that discuss queer topics or people from our schools tells our queer students that they do not belong there, that their existence is shameful. I am not shameful," they added. "School is one of the main places that children read, and being able to access literature in which you can see yourself can be instrumental to a student's discovery of themselves—it certainly was to me."
In response to the judge blocking Iowa's book ban and "don't say LGBTQ" provisions, Lambda Legal senior attorney Nathan Maxwell said that "we are glad our clients, Iowa families, and students will be able to continue the school year free from the harms caused by these parts of this unconstitutional law."
"This decision sends a strong message to the state that efforts to ban books based on LGBTQ+ content, or target speech that sends a message of inclusion to Iowa LGBTQ+ students cannot stand," Maxwell added. "Lambda Legal and the ACLU of Iowa will continue our fight to ensure Iowa schools are safe for LGBTQ+ students."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular