book censorship argumentative essay

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Banned and Challenged: Restricting access to books in the U.S.

Perspective, ashley hope pérez: 'young people have a right' to stories that help them learn.

Ashley Hope Pérez

Author Ashley Hope Pérez wrote Out of Darkness, which is on the American Library Association's lists of most banned books. Kaz Fantone/NPR hide caption

Author Ashley Hope Pérez wrote Out of Darkness, which is on the American Library Association's lists of most banned books.

This essay by Ashley Hope Pérez is part of a series of interviews with — and essays by — authors who are finding their books being challenged and banned in the U.S.

For over a decade, I lived my professional dream. I spent my days teaching college literature courses and writing novels. I regularly visited schools as an author and got to meet teens who reminded me of the students I taught in Houston — the amazing humans who had first inspired me to write for young adults.

Then in 2021, my dream disintegrated into an author and educator's nightmare as my novel Out of Darkness became a target for politically motivated book bans across the country.

Book News & Features

Efforts to ban books jumped an 'unprecedented' four-fold in 2021, ala report says.

Author Interviews

Banned books: author ashley hope pérez on finding humanity in the 'darkness'.

Attacks unfolded, not just on my writing but also on young people's right to read it. Hate mail and threats overwhelmed the inboxes where I once had received invitations for author visits and appreciative notes from readers. At the beginning of 2021, Out of Darkness had been on library shelves for over five years without a single challenge or complaint. As we reach the end of 2022, it has been banned in at least 29 school districts across the country.

From the earliest stages of writing, I knew Out of Darkness would be difficult — for me, and for readers. I drew my inspiration for the novel from an actual school disaster: the 1937 New London school explosion that killed hundreds in an East Texas oil town just 20 minutes from my childhood home. This tragic but little-known historical event serves as the backdrop for a fictional star-crossed romance between a Black teenager and a young Latina who has just arrived in the area.

As I researched the novel, I imagined the explosion as its most devastating event. But to engage honestly with the realities of the time and of my characters' lives, I had to grapple with systemic racism, personal prejudice, sexual abuse and domestic violence. As I wrote, the teenagers' circumstances began to tighten, noose-like, around their lives and love, leading to still more tragedy. I sought to show the depths of harm inflicted on some in this country without sensationalizing that history. The book portrays friendship, loving family, community and healthy relationships because they, too, are part of the characters' world. Then, as now, young people struggle mightily for joy, love and dignity.

When Out of Darkness was first published, I braced for objections. Would readers recoil from the harshness of my characters' realities? Or would they recognize how the novel invites connections between those realities and an ongoing reckoning with racialized violence and police brutality? To my relief, the novel received glowing reviews, earned multiple literary awards, and was named to "best of the year" lists by Kirkus Reviews and School Library Journal . It appeared on reading lists across the country as a recommendation for ambitious young readers ready to face disquieting aspects of the American experience.

So it went until early 2021. In the wake of the 2020 presidential elections, right-wing groups pivoted from a national defeat to "local" issues. The latest wave of book banning exceeds anything ever documented by librarian or free-speech groups. The statistics for 2021, which represent only a fraction of actual removals, reflect a more than 600% increase in challenges and removals as compared to 2020. (See Everylibrary.org for a continually updated database of challenges and bans and PEN America's Banned in the USA reports for April 2022 and September 2022 for further context.)

These book bans do not reflect spontaneous parental concern. Instead, they are part of an orchestrated effort to sow suspicion of public schools as scarily "woke" and to signal opposition to certain identities and topics. Book banners often cite "sexually explicit content" as their reason for objecting to books in high schools. What distinguishes the targeted titles, though, is not their sexual content but that they overwhelmingly center the experiences of BIPOC, LGBTQ+ and other marginalized people. If you were to stack up all the books with sexual content in any library, the tallest stack by far would be about white, straight characters. Tellingly, those are not the books under attack. Claims about "sexual content" are a pretext for erasing the stories that tell Black, Latinx, queer and other non-dominant kids that they matter and belong. Beyond telegraphing disapproval, book bans serve the interests of groups that have long sought to dismantle public education and shut down conversations about important issues.

Debates about the suitability of reading materials in school are nothing new. These include past efforts by progressives to reorient language arts instruction. Concerns about racist language and portrayals might well lead communities to seek alternatives to the teaching of works like The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn . But de-emphasizing problematic classics does not generally entail removing the books from library collections. By contrast, in targeting high school libraries, conservative book banners seek to restrict what individual students may choose to read on their own , disregarding the judgment of school librarians who carefully select materials according to professional standards.

Rather than reading the books themselves, today's book banners rely instead on haphazard lists and talking points circulated online. Social media plays a central role in stoking the fires of censorship. Last year, a video of a woman ranting about a passage from Out of Darkness in a school board meeting went internationally viral. The woman's school board rant resulted in the removal of every copy of Out of Darkness from the district's libraries, triggered copycat performances, and fueled more efforts to ban my book.

Book banning poses a real professional and personal cost to authors and educators. For YA writers, losing access to school and library audiences can be career ending. And it is excruciating to watch people describe our life's work as "filth" or "garbage." We try to find creative ways to respond to the defamation, as I did in my own YouTube video . But there is no competing with the virality of outrage. Meanwhile, librarians and teachers face toxic work conditions that shift the focus from student learning to coping with harassment.

But book banning harms students, and their education, the most. Young people rely on school libraries for accurate information and for stories that broaden their understanding, offer hope and community, and speak honestly to challenges they face. As libraries become battlegrounds, teens notice which books, and which identities, are under attack. Those who share identities with targeted authors or characters receive a powerful message of exclusion: These books don't belong, and neither do you.

Back in 2004, my predominately Latinx high school students in Houston wanted — needed — books that reflected their lives and communities but few such books had been written. In the decades since, authors have worked hard to ensure greater inclusion and respect for the diversity of teen experiences. For students with fewer resources or difficult home situations, though, a book that isn't in the school library might as well not exist. Right-wing groups want to roll back the modest progress we've made, and they are winning.

These "wins" happen even without official bans. Formal censorship becomes unnecessary once bullying, threats and disruption shake educators' focus from students. The result is soft censorship . For example, a librarian reads an outstanding review of a book that would serve someone in their school, but they don't order it out of fear of controversy. This is the internalization of the banners' agenda. The effects of soft censorship are pervasive, pernicious and very difficult to document.

The needs of all students matter, not just those whose lives and identities line up with what book banners think is acceptable. Young people have a right to the resources and stories that help them mature, learn and understand their world in all its diversity. They need more opportunities, not fewer, to experience deep imaginative engagement and the empathy it inspires. We've had enough "banner" years. I hope 2023 returns the focus to young people and their right to read.

Ashley Hope Pérez, author of three novels for young adults, is a former high school English teacher and an assistant professor in the Department of Comparative Studies at The Ohio State University. Find her on Twitter and Instagram or LinkT .

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essay Examples >
• Essays Topics >
• Essay on Literature

Sample Argumentative Essay On Book Censorship

Type of paper: Argumentative Essay

Topic: Literature , Education , Society , Democracy , Books , Violence , Time , Censorship

Published: 03/09/2020

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

Free speech is considered as a part of fundamental rights. Books are a medium of expressing views of authors. Censoring books is not new, and it has been practiced by dominant groups or governments since centuries. Books are censored in order to prevent specific ideas from spreading. Books are censored by governments or other powerful people due to different reasons. This paper intends to discuss book censorship along with discussing how productive or counterproductive book censoring is. Books are a source of knowledge and educate people. Censoring books deprives people of knowledge and learning, but this is only aspects of the issue. Books belong to different categories. Books may be educative but on the other hand they may be provocative. Books may be written with good intention but there may be ill intention behind writing books. Censoring books is one of much-debated issues, and people have difference of opinion on this issue. Some argue in favor of censoring books while others oppose censoring books (Foerstel). Censoring books is arbitrary and usually it affects the society in a negative manner. People, especially students are deprived of various ideas and information after books are censored. Censoring books is an attempt of oppressing ideas and prevent them from spreading further. These ideas may be positive or negative, but they are certainly not in favor of those who intend to censor them. Governments or power groups or supporters of an ideology want to prevent other ideologies from escalating further and censor books. But, on the other hand, sometimes people, themselves or through authors, propagate some ideas that are divisive and may disturb the peace of society. Though censoring books is considered as oppressing the idea of freedom of expression but sometimes censoring becomes unavoidable in order to maintain law and order situation in the society. When governments notice that certain ideas are spread with a conflict-ridden agenda and usually in order to destabilize the existing establishments, censoring books becomes indispensable (American Library Association). Any book that presents relevant information or critical analysis of any subject in a logical or factual way should not be censored. Censoring books, merely because the same is against any ideology, is arbitrary but at the same time if any book creates violence or incites rapes, it deserves to be censored. Various religious authors incite followers of certain religions against other believers through writing provocative books. Censoring books deprives a large population of knowing certain ideas but at the same time, it creates a sense of curiosity among people, and they try to get the censored book at any cost. It has been observed in a number of cases that censoring book helps in making it more popular and people get the censored book through different other channels. Due to latest communication mediums in modern times, censoring book may not be very effective as it used to be in ancient times (Cohen). Having observed an overview and succinct analysis of the abovementioned subject, the paper concludes that censoring book is against the idea of freedom of expression. But at the same time it becomes necessary to censor some books that spread hate, rumors or incite violence of any kind. Censoring books because of mere disagreement of views is oppressive but if any book is written with an acrimonious intention, it deserves to be banned.

Works Cited

Association, American Library. The Freedom to Read. USA: American Library Association, 1972. Cohen, Nick. You Can’t Read This Book: Censorship in an Age of Freedom. London: HarperCollins UK, 2012. Foerstel, Herbert N. Banned in the U.S.A.: A Reference Guide to Book Censorship in Schools and Public Libraries. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002.

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 1619

This paper is created by writer with

ID 285920420

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Browser term papers, examination term papers, storage term papers, password term papers, comprehension term papers, virtue term papers, disadvantage term papers, hardware term papers, deed term papers, cure term papers, motor term papers, formation term papers, poetry college essays, research paper on kadcyla a new treatment for breast cancer, social justice essay examples, free essay on death penalty in the usa, good example of korean culture and collectivism essay, good example of research paper on equal employment opportunity commission, example of essay on bacterial life, free essay about what is the meaning of the anishinabe ethic of non interference please explain and give an example of behaviour, good essay about factors affecting marketing strategy, quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature a critical review article review, good example of the negative effects of bottled water case study, good merger acqusition and international strategies research paper example, example of paypal advertising during super bowl essay, burial site essays, masaccio essays, angelico essays, fra angelico essays, benozzo gozzoli essays, cosimo essays, journey of the magi essays, virgin mary essays, annunciation essays, galleria essays, cause of death essays, reunification essays, beverly essays, jonestown essays, wickman essays, wyszynski essays, lupton essays.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

A Case for Reading - Examining Challenged and Banned Books

• Resources & Preparation
• Instructional Plan
• Related Resources

Any work is potentially open to attack by someone, somewhere, sometime, for some reason. This lesson introduces students to censorship and how challenges to books occur. They are then invited to read challenged or banned books from the American Library Association's list of the most frequently challenged books . Students decide for themselves what should be done with these books at their school by writing a persuasive essay explaining their perspectives. Students share their pieces with the rest of the class, and as an extension activity, can share their essays with teachers, librarians, and others in their school.

Featured Resources

T-Chart Printout : This printable sheet allows students to keep notes on parts of books that they believe might be challenged, as well as supporting reasons. Persuasive Writing Rubric : Use this rubric to evaluate the organization, conventions, goal, delivery, and mechanics of students' persuasive writing. The rubric can be adapted for any persuasive essay. Persuasion Map : Use this online tool to map out and print your persuasive argument. Included are spaces to map out your thesis, three reasons, and supporting details.

From Theory to Practice

There are times that the books that are part of our curriculum are found to be questionable or offensive by other groups. Should teachers stop using those texts? Should the books be banned from schools? No! "Censorship leaves students with an inadequate and distorted picture of the ideals, values, and problems of their culture. Partly because of censorship or the fear of censorship, many writers are ignored or inadequately represented in the public schools, and many are represented in anthologies not by their best work but by their ‘safest' or ‘least offensive' work," as stated in the NCTE Guideline. What then should the English teacher do? "Freedom of inquiry is essential to education in a democracy. To establish conditions essential for freedom, teachers and administrators need to work together. The community that entrusts students to the care of an English teacher should also trust that teacher to exercise professional judgment in selecting or recommending books. The English teacher can be free to teach literature, and students can be free to read whatever they wish only if informed and vigilant groups, within the profession and without, unite in resisting unfair pressures." This is the Students' Right to Read. Further Reading

Common Core Standards

This resource has been aligned to the Common Core State Standards for states in which they have been adopted. If a state does not appear in the drop-down, CCSS alignments are forthcoming.

State Standards

This lesson has been aligned to standards in the following states. If a state does not appear in the drop-down, standard alignments are not currently available for that state.

NCTE/IRA National Standards for the English Language Arts

• 1. Students read a wide range of print and nonprint texts to build an understanding of texts, of themselves, and of the cultures of the United States and the world; to acquire new information; to respond to the needs and demands of society and the workplace; and for personal fulfillment. Among these texts are fiction and nonfiction, classic and contemporary works.
• 2. Students read a wide range of literature from many periods in many genres to build an understanding of the many dimensions (e.g., philosophical, ethical, aesthetic) of human experience.
• 3. Students apply a wide range of strategies to comprehend, interpret, evaluate, and appreciate texts. They draw on their prior experience, their interactions with other readers and writers, their knowledge of word meaning and of other texts, their word identification strategies, and their understanding of textual features (e.g., sound-letter correspondence, sentence structure, context, graphics).
• 4. Students adjust their use of spoken, written, and visual language (e.g., conventions, style, vocabulary) to communicate effectively with a variety of audiences and for different purposes.
• 5. Students employ a wide range of strategies as they write and use different writing process elements appropriately to communicate with different audiences for a variety of purposes.
• 6. Students apply knowledge of language structure, language conventions (e.g., spelling and punctuation), media techniques, figurative language, and genre to create, critique, and discuss print and nonprint texts.
• 8. Students use a variety of technological and information resources (e.g., libraries, databases, computer networks, video) to gather and synthesize information and to create and communicate knowledge.
• 11. Students participate as knowledgeable, reflective, creative, and critical members of a variety of literacy communities.
• 12. Students use spoken, written, and visual language to accomplish their own purposes (e.g., for learning, enjoyment, persuasion, and the exchange of information).

Materials and Technology

• Selected books as examples (from the most frequently challenged books list)
• Example Family Letter
• Persuasion Map
• Book Challenge Investigation Bookmarks
• Persuasive Writing Rubric

Preparation

• Because this lesson requires that students read a book from the ALA Challenged Book list, it’s a good idea to notify families prior to starting the assignment. See the example family letter for ideas on how to notify families.
• Bookmark the websites listed as resources to refer to throughout the lesson.
• Compile grade-appropriate books for students to explore using the Challenged Children's Books list .  Talk to your librarian or school media specialist about creating a resource collection for students to use in your classroom or in the library.
• Copy T-Charts and/or bookmarks for students to document passages as they read.
• Test the Persuasion Map on your computers to familiarize yourself with the tool.

Student Objectives

Students will:

• be exposed to the issues of censorship, challenged, or banned books.
• examine issues of censorship as it relates to a specific literature title.
• critically evaluate books based on relevancy, biases, and errors.
• develop and support a position on a particular book by writing a persuasive essay about their chosen title.

Session One

• Display a selection of banned or challenged books in a prominent place in your classroom. Include in this selection books meant for children and any included in the school curriculum. Ask students to speculate on what these books have in common.
• Explain to the students that these books have been "censored."  Ask students to brainstorm a definition of censorship and record the students' ideas on the board or chart paper. When you have come up with a definition the group agrees on, have students record the definition.
• Brainstorm ways in which things are censored for them already and who controls what is censored and how. Examples include Internet filtering, ratings on movies, video games, music, and self-censoring (choosing to watch only 1 news show or choosing not to read a certain type of book).  Discuss circumstances in which censorship would be necessary, if any, with the students.
• Provide the students’ definitions for challenged books as well as banned books. (Share these American Library Association definitions: “A challenge is an attempt to remove or restrict materials based upon the objections of a person or group. A banning is the removal of those materials.”)
• After the students have seen the ALA definition, have the students “grow” in their own definitions. Ask them to revisit their definition and align it with the one presented by the American Library Association.
• Invite the students to brainstorm any books that they have heard of that have been challenged or banned from schools or libraries. Ask them if they know why those books were found to be controversial.
• Students should then brainstorm titles of other books that they feel could possibly be challenged or banned from their school collection.  Allow time for students to share these titles with their classmates and offer an explanation of why they think these titles could possibly be challenged or banned.
• Share with the students a list of banned books .
• Did they find them to be entertaining, informative, beneficial or objectionable?
• Can they suggest reasons why someone would object to elementary, middle school or high school students reading these books?
• If desired, complete the session by allowing students to learn more about Banned Books Week , additional challenged/banned books, and cases involving First Amendment Rights.

Session Two

• From a teacher-selected list of grade-appropriate books from the Challenged Children's Books list , have groups of students select one of the books to read in literature circles, traditional reading groups, or through read-alouds.
• As the students read, ask them to pay particular attention to the features in the books that may have made them controversial. As students find quotes/parts of the book that they find to be controversial, they should add them to their T-Chart , along with an explanation of why they think that this area could be controversial.  On the left side of their T-Chart , they will list the quote or section of the book (with page numbers); on the right side of the T-Chart , they will write their thoughts on why this area could be seen as controversial.
• You may also choose to invite the students to use bookmarks (in addition to or instead of the T-Chart ) , so they can record page numbers and passages as they read.

Session Three

• After the students have completed the reading of their book, have a group or class discussion on the students' findings that they recorded on their bookmarks or T-Chart .
• Next, explain to students that they will be writing a persuasive piece stating what they believe should be done with the book that has been challenged. If students read the book in groups, they could write a team response.
• Share the  Persuasive Writing Rubric to explore the requirements of the assignment in more detail and allow for students' questions about the assignment.
• Demonstrate the Persuasion Map and work through a sample book challenge to show students how to use the tool to structure their essays.
• Provide students with access to computers, and allow students the remainder of class to work with the Persuasion Map as a brainstorming tool and to guide them through work on their papers.  If computer access is a problem, you may provide students with print copies of the Persuasion Map Printout .
• Encourage students to share their thoughts and opinions with the class as they work on their drafts.  Students should print out their work at the end of the session.

Session Four

• Invite students to share their persuasive pieces with the rest of the class. It is their job to persuade teachers, librarians, or administrators to keep the book in their collection, remove the book from their collection, or add the book to their collection.
• For an authentic sharing session, invite parents in for a panel discussion while the children present their thoughts and opinions on the matter of challenged and banned books.
• Students can discuss the books after each presentation to draw conclusions about each title and about censorship and challenges overall.

Concerned Parent The concerned parent is interested in how controversial materials affect school children. The concerned parent wants to maintain a healthy learning environment for students.   Classroom Teacher The Classroom Teacher needs to select books that will both match the interests of the students and also meet the requirements of the curriculum. The Classroom Teacher needs to listen to the parents, and also follow the rules of the school.   School Library Media Specialist The School Library Media Specialist selects library materials based on the curriculum and reading interests the students in the school.   School Lawyer The School Lawyer is concerned about how the students’ civil liberties would be affected if the School Board decided to ban books.

• Students can elicit responses and reactions from peers, teachers, administrators, librarians, the author, and parents in regards to the particular book they are researching. Ask students to focus on the appropriateness of the book in reference to an elementary school collection.  
• Discuss Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico and how after the decision from that court case public school districts around the country developed policies concerning book challenges in elementary, middle, and high school libraries.
• Students can play the role of the librarian and decide where a challenged/banned book should be shelved. For example, the challenged book may be a picture book, but the “librarian” might decide that the book should instead be shelved in the Teacher Resource Section of the library. An alternative for Sessions Three and Four for this lesson plan is to ask students to write persuasive essays explaining where the book should be shelved and why it should be shelved there.

Student Assessment / Reflections

• As students discuss censorship and challenged/banned books, and as they read their selected text, listen for comments that indicate they are identifying specific examples from the story that connect to the information they have learned (you should also check for evidence of this on their bookmarks or T-Chart ). The connections that they make between the details in the novel and the details they choose as their supporting reasons for their persuasive piece will reveal their understanding and engagement with the books.
• Monitor student interaction and progress during any group work to assess social skills and assist any students having problems.
• Respond to the content and quality of students’ thoughts in their final reflections on the project. Look for indications that the student provides supporting evidence for the reflections, thus applying the lessons learned from the work with the Persuasion Map .
• Assess students’ persuasive writing piece using the rubric .
• Calendar Activities
• Professional Library
• Student Interactives
• Lesson Plans

Students brainstorm reasons why certain books might have been banned and discuss common reasons why books are challenged.

Students adapt a Roald Dahl story to picture book format and share their books and add them to the classroom library. Additionally, they compare a book version and film version of one of Dahl's works.

Bring the celebration of reading and literacy into your classroom, library, school, and home all year long.

The current edition of The Students' Right to Read is an adaptation and updating of the original Council statement, including "Citizen's Request for Reconsideration of a Work."

The Persuasion Map is an interactive graphic organizer that enables students to map out their arguments for a persuasive essay or debate.

Add new comment

• Print this resource

Explore Resources by Grade

• Kindergarten K

• Other Journals

Book Censorship in the United States

A government documents story.

Claudia Davidson

I n recent years, book bans and censorship have been serious topics of conversation in the United States. The American Library Association has been compiling data regarding censorship in libraries for more than twenty years. An announcement on March 22nd, 2023, reported 1,269 book censorship demands in 2022, the highest number yet recorded. 1

According to the announcement, this data is compiled through reports given to ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom and challenges covered in the press. However, many censorship attempts are not reported, so this annual data is an incomplete overview of yearly trends. “Challenge” is defined as a complaint or attempt at removal; some challenges are resolved without removing the item from collections, while others do result in restriction or removal. Despite continual reports of challenges, ALA finds that most Americans are against book censorship and believe librarians make good decisions when building collections. 2

2022 and 2023 featured an onslaught of federal and state attempts to censor materials. One of these is H.R.5, The Parents Bill of Rights Act , which passed the House of Representatives in March of 2023. This act would make it federally mandatory for elementary and secondary schools to notify parents of their rights to “inspect the books and other reading materials in the library of their child’s school.” 3 Many criticize this act as an effort to ban more books in school libraries and to censor teachers. 4

Book censorship has a vast international history beyond the last few years. This paper will highlight common historical and present-day reasons for book censorship across the United States. I will track the evolution of obscenity laws, a main player in book censorship for decades. I will discuss other common reasons for censorship, including LGBTQ+ themes, religious values, race, and political ideology.

On its web page “About Banned and Challenged Books,” the American Library Association quotes Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. in Texas v. Johnson (1989): “If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” 5 Historically, however, “obscenity laws” have blurred the boundaries between what is dangerous and what is merely disagreeable to some.

Obscenity Laws

Central to the issue of book censorship is the question of obscenity. The definition of “obscenity” is often subjective. It is important to address what or who has historically decided whether material is inappropriate enough to be removed, censored, or restricted.

Anthony Comstock is an influential figure in developing United States obscenity laws. With the help of the Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA) in 1872, Comstock formed the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice. His slogan was “Morals, Not Art or Literature” (pp 294). 6

In 1873, Comstock successfully urged Congress to pass a bill that would be known as the Comstock Act. 7 It mandates that no “obscene, lewd, or lascivious book, pamphlet, picture, paper, print, or other publication of an indecent character [. . .] shall be carried in the mail.” Any person who sends such materials in the mail would face fines or imprisonment. The Comstock Act specifically bans the mailing of contraceptives and any medical information on abortion and birth control but does not otherwise define “obscene, lewd, and lascivious” 8

Despite its passage, the Comstock Act was far from universal acceptance. The National Defense Association, formed in response to the act, wrote a petition to repeal the law. It received over 70,000 signatures and was sent to Congress, but Comstock successfully alleged that many of the signatures were forgeries. 9

Immediately following the passage of the Comstock Act, Anthony Comstock was appointed Special Agent of the Post Office Department, which gave him the power to enforce his namesake law. 10 The United States Postal Inspection Service has a timeline on its website, which features a photo of Comstock for 1873. The caption reads, “The Postal Obscenity Statute is enacted by Congress, based on the urging of Special Agent Anthony Comstock.” 11

The Comstock Act was used to arrest Deboigne Bennett in 1879 for mailing a copy of Cupid’s Yokes (1876) by Ezra Heywood. 12 The case United States v. Bennett is notable because it set an official definition of obscenity in the United States by adopting the “Hicklin Test,” the British test of obscenity established in Regina v. Hicklin (1868). United States v. Bennett quotes Lord Chief Justice Cockburn as concluding in Regina v. Hicklin:

I think the test of obscenity is this, whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall. (pp 33)

The judge in Bennett agrees that this is a reasonable measure of obscenity. This case references a case against the author of the book in question, Ezra Heywood:

In the trial of the Heywood Case, Judge Clark, in charging the jury, said: A book is obscene, which is offensive to decency. A book, to be obscene, need not be obscene throughout the whole of its contents, but, if the book is obscene, lewd, or lascivious or indecent in whole or in part, it is an obscene book, within the meaning of the law, a lewd and lascivious and indecent book. (p. 34)

The judge confirms that the present case holds the same views (p. 66). These cases mandate that a book is obscene and thus banned from distribution through the postal service if merely one part of the whole provokes impure thoughts. 13 This set a more specific definition of obscenity than the 1873 Comstock Law but still did not address the central issues of interpretation, subjective experience, and varying personal belief systems.

The 1933 district court case United States v. One Book Called Ulysses is a landmark case in which the United States federal government attempted a ban. 14 The government claimed that the 1922 James Joyce novel Ulysses was obscene and thus banned from international importation under 19 U.S.C.S. § 1305. 15 Judge John M. Woolsey found that the novel was not written with pornographic intent and instead attempted to describe the realistic thoughts and actions of everyday people living in Dublin in 1904. The novel’s “obscene” words would have been known by most people at the time, and “under an objective, reasonable man standard,” the sexual content was not found to be out of the ordinary. Because it was not found to provoke impure thoughts beyond the average, Ulysses was not banned from importation. Judge Woolsey considered the book’s literary intent as a whole, a stark difference from the judge in United States v. Bennett, who refused to provide the jury with any passages of Cupid’s Yokes other than the few flagged as potentially obscene (pp 2). 16 This act of viewing the questionable passages in context set the precedent to permit the importation of future works of literature containing sexual themes and coarse language.

The 1957 case Roth v. United States established a new test of obscenity. 17 Samuel Roth, a New York City publisher and author, was previously tried for mailing a magazine containing erotic stories and pornographic photos. He was found guilty of violating 18 US Code § 1461, which bars the mailing of obscene materials. 18 David Alberts, a Californian mail-order business owner, was convicted under California Penal Code §٣١١ for mailing pornographic photos. 19 Both appealed on grounds of First Amendment violations. The cases were consolidated before the Supreme Court in Roth v. United States . The judge determined that obscene materials were not covered by freedom of speech or press:

All ideas having even the slightest redeeming social importance—unorthodox ideas, controversial ideas, even ideas hateful to the prevailing climate of opinion—have the full protection of the guaranties . . . but implicit in the history of the First Amendment is the rejection of obscenity as utterly without redeeming social importance. (pp. 484–85).

This was a change from the Hicklin standard adopted in United States v. Bennett , which asserted that only one part of a material must cause impure thoughts to be banned from the postal system. 20 Roth clarifies that, to be considered obscene and thus not covered by the First Amendment, the material’s sole purpose must be to incite lustful thoughts.

In 1959, Reader’s Subscription, Inc mailed copies of an uncensored Grove Press version of D.H. Lawrence’s Lady Chatterley’s Lover to book club subscribers. The post office seized these copies and barred the Reader’s Subscription from mailing on grounds of Lady Chatterley’s Lover ’s obscenity. Reader’s Subscription brought the post office to trial for unduly causing great harm to their business. The entire case file can be found on Archives.gov, and the transcripts provide insight into the legal conversation around what constitutes obscenity. 21 The transcript clarifies that D.H. Lawrence himself “did not believe in promiscuity, nor in homosexuality” (pp 43). It cites cases from the prior two years in which the Supreme Court judged materials to be against average community standards and thus obscene. These include magazines showing nude men and women, a magazine containing a story about a lesbian and a poem about a gay man, and a film containing a pedophilic scene (pp 48-49). Because Lady Chatterley’s Lover contains neither nude photos, homosexuality, or pedophilia, the court decided it was not considered obscene. The newly adopted definition of obscenity from the Roth case most likely played a role in this verdict, as it required that a material as a whole be inappropriate, not just small parts of it. 22

The definition of obscenity changed again in 1973 with the Miller v. California decision. Miller sent out advertisements for the sale of “adult” materials, and some people received them unwillingly. The court again held that the First Amendment does not protect obscenity, then adjusted the definition as established in Roth. Now, obscene material must, as a whole, lack “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” 23 This is the same test in use today, and it is listed on The United States Department of Justice’s “Citizen’s Guide to U.S. Federal Law on Obscenity” web page. 24 Crucially, the Miller standard focuses on applying “community standards” rather than one national standard for determining obscenity:

The jury may measure the essentially factual issues of prurient appeal and patent offensiveness by the standard that prevails in the forum community and need not employ a “national standard” ( 30-34). 25

This officially grants state and local levels the authority to determine obscenity, making it possible for a material to be considered obscene in one community and acceptable in another.

Obscenity is a common reason for book challenges today. HB 1205 of North Dakota passed a second reading in the House as of April 2023. This bill adopts language from the Miller Test to ban sexually explicit materials in public libraries. It focuses on children’s collections and leaves the determination of what constitutes “sexually explicit” to the “prevailing standards in the adult community in North Dakota as a whole with respect to what is suitable material for minors” (Section 1.a(3)). 26

Virginia is an example of a state that has instituted its own obscenity law. § ١٨.٢-٣٨٤: “Proceeding against book alleged to be obscene ,” gives citizens of any Virginia county the power to institute a court proceeding against any person or company that sells or distributes a book they deem obscene. 27 Similar to the Miller standard, this statute dictates that obscenity is determined through local community standards and artistic value. Section E of this statute allows the court to issue a temporary sale ban on the offensive material before obscenity is legally determined. Section K mandates that during the temporary restraining order period, any person who sells or distributes the material is presumed to know it is considered obscene, meaning the seller could be charged even if they are unfamiliar with the content.

In an August 30, 2022, press release, the American Civil Liberties Union announced that the Circuit Court of Virginia Beach declined to label two books obscene after two petitions were filed. The books in question were Gender Queer (2019) by Maia Kobabe and A Court of Mist and Fury (2016) by Sarah J. K. Maas. 28 In a final order issued by Judge Pamela S. Baskerville, Virginia Code § ١٨.٢-٣٨٤ is declared unconstitutional for authorizing a prior restraint, presuming culpability of distributors who may not know a book’s obscenity status, and for violating due process. 29

Book Censorship Based on Ideas

Obscenity is far from the only reason for book censorship in the United States. Censorship of specific ideologies, beliefs, scientific theories, and identities is a historical and present theme.

One idea that was historically censored in text is evolution. One of the longest-lasting bans was in Tennessee from 1925–1967. The 1925 Butler Act, “To prohibit the teaching of evolution in all schools in the State,” made it illegal for any partially or fully state-funded school or university to teach any theory that undermines biblical Creationism or claims humans are descended from a lower species (Section 1). 30 This extended to using Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species in schools and universities. The Butler Act was not overturned until 1967 in Tennessee House Bill No. 48. 31

Book censorship based on political ideology was prevalent during the “Red Scare” period between roughly 1917–1957. There were rumors that the United States government burned books associated with communism, as evidenced in a 1953 Memorandum from the Director of the Psychological Strategy Board to the Under Secretary of State, found in volume 2, part 2 of the Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS), National Security Affairs. 32 It expresses concern for world opinion due to reports of book burnings in overseas libraries. The memorandum recommends that the State Department manage overseas libraries with the same dedication to freedom of reading as stateside libraries. In the same FRUS volume is “Infoguide Bulletin 303,” which discusses how the State Department will manage Communist materials. Point three of the plan demands that periodic issues containing “any material detrimental to US objectives” be removed from United States Information Service (USIS) overseas libraries. Number four declares that all works from Communist authors are banned from such libraries (pp. 1686–87). 33

The Communist Control Act of 1954, with a stated aim to “outlaw the Communist Party,” advocates for censoring materials with ideas related to Communism. 34 Section 5 specifically outlines evidence that might suggest someone is a member of the Party. Points 9 and 10 condemn those who have “prepared documents, pamphlets, leaflets, books, or any other type of publication in behalf of the objectives and purposes of the organization,” and those who have “mailed, shipped, circulated, distributed, delivered, or in any other way sent or delivered to others material or propaganda of any kind in behalf of the organization” (pp. 775–77).

Sexuality, Gender, and Race Theory

Across present-day lists of challenged books, certain trends are apparent. The American Library Association compiles yearly book challenge reports. Each year, “sexually explicit” subject matter is one of the most common reasons for challenges. Many of these books are also LGBTQIA+ inclusive. 35

In October of 2021, Texas Senator Matt Krause issued an inquiry to the Texas Education Agency regarding the possession of certain books. 36 The letter commands that each Texas school district report how many copies of each book on an attached list they possess, how much funding was spent on them, and to list any other books they possess on the following topics:

Human sexuality, sexually transmitted diseases, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), sexually explicit images, graphic presentations of sexual behavior that is in violation of the law, or contain material that might make students feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress because of their race or sex or convey that a student, by virtue of their race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously. 37

The attached list targets 850 titles, many of which focus on LGBTQ+ identities and struggles, race and racism, abortion, and gender. The Texas Tribune has combined a full list of challenged titles . 38

Florida’s 2022 House Bill 1467 requires the review of every book in all K-12 libraries by a media specialist who has undergone mandatory Florida Department of Education materials review training. This includes classroom libraries previously developed by teachers. HB 1467 requires that each school library have a searchable database of its materials, and it mandates that, beginning June 30, 2023, each district school board submit a report to the Commissioner of Education listing every material that received a complaint and actions taken in response. 39

Two other Florida bills passed in 2022 supplement HB 1467. These are House Bill 1557, called the “Don’t Say Gay’’ law by critics, and HB 7, the “Stop the Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees (W.O.K.E.) Act.” Section 3 of HB 1557 prohibits instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity by school employees or third parties in grades K-12. 40 In March of 2023, Governor Ron DeSantis proposed expanding this Act to include restrictions on teaching about sexual orientation and gender identity up to the 12th grade. 41 Florida’s House Bill 7 prohibits “instructional materials reviewers from recommending instructional materials that contain any matter that contradicts certain principles” (48-50). 42 One of these principles is that “a person’s moral character or status as either privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her race, color, national origin, or sex” (233–35).

Due to these new laws, Florida media specialists, teachers, and school board members have begun to exercise great caution to avoid risking their careers. A fact sheet on Duval County’s website describes the steps the school board is taking to comply with these recent laws. 43 They have reviewed about 10,000 books so far using the state-mandated review process, but there is a total of about 1.6 million titles that 54 media specialists across the county must review The web page states, “Based on state training on multiple laws dealing with gender and racial ideology in books,” Duval County is looking for material that might be considered pornographic, instruction on sexual and gender orientation, or might describe someone as “inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously, solely by virtue of his or her race or sex.” These descriptions encompass materials targeted by HB 1557 and HB 7. Full guidelines for reviewers can be found in Florida Statute 1006.31(2)(d): Duties of the Department of Education and school district instructional materials reviewer. 44

Book censorship attempts are pervasive across the nation. For all the people who advocate for censorship of ideas, identities, and experiences through the written word, many people also fight for intellectual freedom and the freedom to read. In a 2022 hearing before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties titled “Free Speech Under Attack: Book Bans and Academic Censorship,” many of these voices were heard. 45 Teachers, librarians, students, and American Civil Rights Activist Ruby Bridges advocated for freedom of speech and thought in schools and universities. Jamie Raskin, Chairman of the Committee, opened with some insight:

The First Amendment, I used to tell my constitution law students, is like Abraham Lincoln’s golden apple of liberty . . . Everybody wants to take just one or two bites out of the apple. But if we allow all those bites, there is no apple left. The freedom of speech disappears. The way to save the apple for all of us is to learn to tolerate the speech you will bore as well as the speech you agree with. It is not always easy, but this is incumbent upon people living in a free democratic society. If we cancel or censor everything that people find offensive, nothing will be left (p. 2).

In the words of Shreya Mehta, a Richland, Washington student who spoke at the hearing, “I believe that words have a lot of power and that they can teach us empathy and strengthen our democracy” (p. 7). Despite attempts to censor materials based on individual opinion, fear, and offensiveness, this is the essence of living under the United States’ First Amendment.

Claudia Davidson ( [email protected] ) is a Master of Library and Information Studies student at the School of Information at Florida State University. This paper was written for (e.g.) Z525 Government Information, Spring 2023, Professor Mohamed Berray.

• “American Library Association Reports Record Number of Demands to Censor Library Books and Materials in 2022,” ALA News, https://www.ala.org/news/press-releases/2023/03/record-book-bans-2022 .
• “Voters Oppose Book Bans in Libraries,” American Library Association, https://www.ala.org/advocacy/voters-oppose-book-bans-libraries .
• Parents Bill of Rights Act, H.R. 5, 118th Cong. (2023), https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5 .
• Marc Egan, “NEA Urges NO Vote on Parents Bill of Rights Act, H.R. 5,” National Education Association (letter to US House of Representatives, March 23, 2023), https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/action-center/letters-testimony/nea-urges-no-vote-parents-bill-rights-act-hr-5 .
• “Banned and Challenged Books: About Banned and Challenged Books,” American Library Association, https://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/aboutbannedbooks .
• Frank W. Smith Jr., “Obscenity: From Hicklin to Hicklin,” University of Richmond Law Notes 2, no. 5 (Spring 1967), 289–343, https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/urich2&i=307 .
• Brandon Burnette, “Comstock Act of 1873,” The First Amendment Encyclopedia, Middle Tennessee State University , https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1038/comstock-act-of-1873#:~:text=The%20Comstock%20Act%20of%201873,picture%2C%20drawing%2C%20or%20advertisement.
• Act of 1873, Ch. 258, Sec. 148, 17 Stat. 599, https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=017/llsl017.db&recNum=640 .
• Committee on Post Office and Post Roads, “Letter against the Comstock Act” (March 18, 1879), https://history.house.gov/HouseRecord/Detail/15032436135 .
• Burnette, “Comstock Act of 1873.”
• “History of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service,” United States Postal Inspection Service, https://www.uspis.gov/about/history-of-uspis#1873.
• United States v. Bennett, 16 Blatchf. 338, 8 Reporter 38 (Circuit Court, S. D. New York, 1879). https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/F.Cas/0024.f.cas/0024.f.cas.1093.pdf
• United States v. One Book Called Ulysses, 5 F. Supp. 182 (S.D.N.Y. 1933). Retrieved from Nexis Uni database.
• Immoral Articles; Importation Prohibited, 19 U.S.C. § 1305, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2021-title19/pdf/USCODE-2021-title19-chap4-subtitleII-partI-sec1305.pdf .
• United States v. Bennett.
• Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957). Retrieved from Nexis Uni database.
• Mailing Obscene or Crime-Inciting Matter, 18 U.S.C. § 1461, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2021-title18/pdf/USCODE-2021-title18-partI-chap71-sec1461.pdf .
• California Penal Code §٣١١ , https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=311 .
• Reader’s Subscription, Inc. v. Robert K. Christenberry, Postmaster of New York City, June 10 1959–July 27 1960 [Electronic Resource]; Records of District Courts of the United States 1685-2009, Record Group 21; Civil Case Files 1938-1995; National Archives at New York [online version available through the Archival Research Catalog], https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7595378 .
• Roth v. United States.
• Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973). Retrieved from Nexis Uni database.
• “Citizen’s Guide to U.S. Federal Law on Obscenity,” The United States Department of Justice, https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-federal-law-obscenity#:~:text=Federal%20law%20prohibits%20the%20possession,borders%20for%20purposes%20of%20distribution.
• Miller v. California.
• A Bill for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 12.1-27.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to prohibiting public libraries from maintaining explicit sexual material; to provide for a legislative management report; and to provide for application, H.B. 1205, (North Dakota 2023), https://www.ndlegis.gov/assembly/68-2023/regular/documents/23-0407-04000.pdf .
• Proceeding Against Book Alleged to be Obscene, § ١٨.٢-٣٨٤, Code of Virginia, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter8/section18.2-384/ .
• American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), “Virginia Judge Rejects Obscenity Proceedings Against Gender Queer and A Court of Mist and Fury,” press release, August 30, 2022, https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/virginia-judge-rejects-obscenity-proceedings-against-gender-queer-and-court-mist-and .
• Pamela S. Baskervil, “Final Order Dismissing Proceedings & Declaring Section 18.2-384 Unconstitutional, In re: A Court of Mist and Fury” (August 30, 2022), https://www.aclu.org/cases/virginia-obscenity-proceedings-against-two-books?document=final-order-dismissing-proceedings-declaring-section-182-384-unconstitutional .
• “An Act prohibiting the teaching of the Evolution Theory in all the Universities, Normals, and all other public schools of Tennessee, which are supported in whole or in part by the public school funds of the State, and to provide penalties for the violations thereof,” H.B. 185, Ch. 27, Sixty-Fourth General Assembly (Tennessee 1925), http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/tennstat.htm .
• An act to repeal Section 49-1922, Tennessee Code Annotated, prohibiting the teaching of evolution, H.B. 48 (Tennessee 1967), https://teva.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/scopes/id/175/ .
• “Memorandum by the Acting Director of the Psychological Strategy Board (Morgan) to the Under Secretary of State (Smith),” Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952-1954, National Security Affairs, Volume II, Part 2, https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v02p2/d343 .
• “Infoguide Bulletin 303,” Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952-1954, National Security Affairs, Volume II, Part 2, 1686-1687, https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v02p2/pg_1686 .
• An Act to outlaw the Communist Party, Pub. L. 637, 68 Stat. 775 (1954), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-68/pdf/STATUTE-68-Pg775.pdf#page=1.
• “Banned and Challenged Books: Infographics” American Library Association, accessed August 17, 2023, https://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/statistics .
• Richard Dahl, “Book Banning Efforts are on the Rise. What Does the Law Say?,” FindLaw (blog), January 6, 2022, https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/book-banning-efforts-are-on-the-rise-what-does-the-law-say/ .
• Matt Krause, email message to Lily Laux and Superintendents, “Re: School District Content Inquiry” (October 25, 2021), https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/965725d7f01b8a25ca44b6fde2f5519b/krauseleter.pdf?_ga=2.167958177.1655224844.1635425114-1180900626.1635425114 .
• Matt Krause Book List [PDF Document], Texas Tribune, 2022, krausebooklist.pdf , https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/94fee7ff93eff9609f141433e41f8ae1/krausebooklist.pdf .
• An Act Relating to K-12 Education, H.B. 1467 (Florida 2022), https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1467 .
• An Act Relating to Parental Rights in Education, H.B. 1557 (Florida 2022), https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557 .
• Fla. Admin. Reg. Vol. ٤٩, p. ٩٣١, (March ١٦, ٢٠٢٣), https://flrules.org/Faw/FAWDocuments/FAWVOLUMEFOLDERS٢٠٢٣/٤٩٥٢/٤٩٥٢doc.pdf .
• An Act Relating to Individual Freedom, H.B. 7 (Florida 2022), https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/7 .
• Tracy Pierce and Laureen Ricks, “Facts about Library Books in Duval County Public Schools,” Duval County Public Schools (February 17, 2023), https://www.teamduval.org/2023/02/17/facts-about-library-books-in-duval-county-public-school
• Fla. Sta 1006.31: Duties of the Department of Education and school district instructional materials reviewer (Florida 2022), http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=1000-1099/1006/Sections/1006.31.html .
• House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Reform, Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Free Speech Under Attack: Book Bans and Censorship, Hearings, 117th Cong., 2nd sess. (April 7, 2022), https://www.congress.gov/117/meeting/house/114616/documents/HHRG-117-GO02-Transcript-20220407.pdf .

Top Ten Government Documents

• There are currently no refbacks.

© 2023 GODORT

ALA Privacy Policy

What You Need to Know About the Book Bans Sweeping the US

What you need to know about the book bans sweeping the u.s., as school leaders pull more books off library shelves and curriculum lists amid a fraught culture war, we explore the impact, legal landscape and history of book censorship in schools..

• The American Library Association reported a record-breaking number of attempts to ban books in 2022— up 38 percent from the previous year. Most of the books pulled off shelves are “written by or about members of the LGBTQ+ community and people of color."
• U.S. school boards have broad discretion to control the material disseminated in their classrooms and libraries. Legal precedent as to how the First Amendment should be considered remains vague, with the Supreme Court last ruling on the issue in 1982.
• Battles to censor materials over social justice issues pose numerous implications for education while also mirroring other politically-motivated acts of censorship throughout history. 

Here are all of your questions about book bans answered by TC experts. 

Alex Eble, Assistant Professor of Economics and Education; Sonya Douglass, Professor of Education Leadership; Michael Rebell, Professor of Law and Educational Practice; and Ansley Erickson, Associate Professor of History and Education Policy. (Photos; TC Archives) 

How Do Book Bans Impact Students? 

Prior to the rise in bans, white male youth were already more likely to see themselves depicted in children’s books than their peers, despite research demonstrating how more culturally inclusive material can uplift all children, according to a study, forthcoming in the Quarterly Journal of Economics , from TC’s Alex Eble.  

“Books can change outcomes for students themselves when they see people who look like them represented,” explains the Associate Professor of Economics and Education. “What people see affects who they become, what they believe about themselves and also what they believe about others…Not having equitable representation robs people of seeing the full wealth of the future that we all can inhabit.” 

While books have stood in the crossfire of political battles throughout history, today’s most banned books address issues related to race, gender identity and sexuality — major flashpoints in the ongoing American culture war. But beyond limiting the scope of how students see themselves and their peers, what are the risks of limiting information access? 

The student plaintiffs in Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico (1982) march in protest of the Long Island school district's removal of titles such as Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut. While the district would ultimately return the banned books to its shelves, the Supreme Court's ultimate ruling largely allowed school leaders to maintain discretion over information access. (Photo credit: unknown) 

“[Book bans] diminish the quality of education students have access to and restrict their exposure to important perspectives that form the fabric of a culturally pluralist society like the United States,” explains TC’s Sonya Douglas s, Professor of Education Leadership. “It's a battle over the soul of the country in many ways; it's about what we teach young people about our country, what we determine to be the truth, and what we believe should be included in the curriculum they're receiving. There's a lot at stake there.” 

Material stripped from libraries and curriculum include works written by Black authors that discuss police brutality, the history of slavery in the U.S. and other issues. As such, Black students are among those who may be most affected by bans across the country, but — in Douglass’ view — this is simply one of the more recent disappointments in a long history of Black communities being let down by public education — chronicled in her 2020 book, and further supported by a 2021 study from Douglass’ Black Education Research Center that revealed how Black families lost trust in schools following the pandemic response and murder of George Floyd.

In that historical and cultural context — even as scholars like Douglass work to implement Black studies curriculums — the failure of schools to properly integrate Black experiences into the curriculum remains vast. 

“We want to make sure that children learn the truth, and that we give them the capacity to handle truths that may be uncomfortable and difficult,” says Douglass, citing Germany as an example of a nation that has prioritized curriculum that highlights its own injustices, such as the Holocaust. “This moment again requires us to take stock of the fact that racism and bigotry still are a challenging part of American life. When we better understand that history, when we see the patterns, when we recognize the source of those issues, we can then do something about it.” 

Beginning in 1933, members of Hitler Youth regularly burned books written by prominent Jewish, liberal, and leftist writers. (Photo: World History Archive / Alamy Stock Photo, dated 1938) 

Why Is Banning Books Legal? 

While legal battles over book censorship in schools consistently unfold at local levels, the wave of book bans across the U.S. surfaces a critical question: why hasn’t the United States had more definitive legal closure on this issue? 

In 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a noncommittal ruling that continues to keep school and library books in the political crosshairs more than 40 years later. In Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico (1982), the Court deemed that “local school boards have broad discretion in the management of school affairs” and that discretion “must be exercised in a manner that comports with the transcendent imperatives of the First Amendment.” 

But what does this mean in practice? In these kinds of cases, the application of the First Amendment hinges on the existence of evidence that books are banned for political reasons and violate freedom of expression. However, without more explicit guidance, school boards often make decisions that prioritize “community values” first and access to information second. 

While today's recent book bans most frequently include topics related to racial justice and gender identity (pictured above), other frequently targeted titles include Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close , The Kite Runner and The Handmaid's Tale . (Cover images courtesy of: Viking Books, Sourcebooks Fire, Balzer + Bray, Oni Press, Random House ‎ and Farrar, Straus and Giroux). 

“America traditionally has prided itself on local control of education — the fact that we have active citizen and parental involvement in school board issues, including curriculum,” explains TC’s Michael Rebell , Professor of Law and Educational Practice. “We have, whether you want to call it a clash or a balancing, of two legal considerations here: the ability of children to freely learn what they need to learn to be able to exercise their constitutional rights, and this traditional right of the school authorities to determine what the curriculum is.” 

So would students benefit from more national and uniform legal guidance on book banning? In this political climate, Rebell attests, the risks very well might outweigh the potential rewards. 

“Your local institutions are —in theory — protecting the values you believe in. And if somebody in Washington were going to say that we couldn't have books that talk about transgender rights and things in New York libraries, we'd go crazy, right?” said Rebell, who leads the Center for Educational Equity . “So I can't imagine that in this polarized environment, people would be in favor of federal law, whatever it said.” 

Why Do Waves of Book Bans Keep Happening?

Historians date censorship back all the way to the earliest appearance of written materials. Ancient Chinese emperor Shih Huang Ti began eliminating historical texts in 259 B.C., and in 35 A.D., Roman emperor Caligula objected to the ideals of Greek freedom depicted in The Odyssey . In numerous waves of censorship since then, book bans have consistently manifested the struggle for political control. 

“We have to think about [the current bans] as part of a longer pattern of fights over what is in curriculum and what is kept out of it,” explains TC’s Ansley Erickson , Associate Professor of History and Education Policy, who regularly prepares local teachers on how to integrate Harlem history into social studies curriculum. 

“The United States’ history, since its inception, is full of uses of curriculum to shape politics, the economy and the culture,” says Erickson. “This is a really dramatic moment, but the curriculum has always been political, and people in power have always been using it to emphasize their power. And historically marginalized groups have always challenged that power.” 

One example: when Latinx students were forbidden from speaking Spanish in their Southwest schools throughout the 20th century, they worked to maintain their traditions and culture at home. 

“These bans really matter, but one of the ways we can imagine a response is by looking back at how people created spaces for what wasn’t given room for in the classroom,” Erickson says. 

What Could Happen Next?

American schools stand at a critical inflection point, and amid this heated debate, Rebell sees civil discourse at school board meetings as a paramount starting point for any sort of resolution. “This mounting crisis can serve as a motivator to bring people together to try to deal with our differences in respectful ways and to see how much common ground can be found on the importance of exposing all of our students to a broad range of ideas and experiences,” says Rebell. “Carve-outs can also be found for allowing parents who feel really strongly that certain content is inconsistent with their religious or other values to exempt their children from certain content without limiting the options for other children.”

But students, families and educators also have the opportunity to speak out, explains Douglass, who expressed concern for how her own daughter is affected by book bans. 

“I’d like to see a groundswell movement to reclaim the nation's commitment to education — to recognize that we're experiencing growing pains and changes in terms of what we stand for; and whether or not we want to live up to the democratic ideal of freedom of speech; different ideas in the marketplace, and a commitment to civics education and political participation,” says Douglass. 

As publishers and librarians file lawsuits to push back, students are also mobilizing to protest bans — from Texas to western New York and elsewhere. But as more local battles unfold, bigger issues remain unsolved. 

“We need to have a conversation as a nation about healing; about being able to confront the past; about receiving an apology and beginning that process of reconciliation,” says Douglass. “Until we tackle that head on, we'll continue to have these types of battles.” 

— Morgan Gilbard

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the speaker to whom they are attributed. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the faculty, administration, staff or Trustees either of Teachers College or of Columbia University.

Tags: Views on the News Education Policy K-12 Education Social Justice

Programs: Economics and Education Education Leadership History and Education

Departments: Education Policy & Social Analysis

Published Wednesday, Sep 6, 2023

Teachers College Newsroom

Address: Institutional Advancement 193-197 Grace Dodge Hall

Box: 306 Phone: (212) 678-3231 Email: views@tc.columbia.edu

• Impact Guild

Censorship or Protection? A Debate on Book Banning in Schools

Book Banning Is on the Rise, But Who Does it Benefit?

By Suzanne Gallagher , Executive Director, Parents’ Rights In Education;  Allan and Sheri Rivlin , CEO and President of Zen Political Research; Asra Q. Nomani , Journalist and Education Advocate

This debate is being published in collaboration with The Impact Guild , a professional network for people who create, use, or distribute media, arts, or entertainment for social good or healthy democracy. 

Is the Removal of Books From a School Library, “Banning?”

By Suzanne Gallagher –  Executive Director, Parents’ Rights In Education

“Banning” is defined as “legally or officially prohibiting something.” In the case of a public school placing restrictions on books based on inappropriate content for minors, no official ban occurs because the controversial books are available elsewhere via booksellers or the Internet. 

The American Library Association (ALA), however, would have you think otherwise. According to a 2022 AP report , the ALA claims the wave of attempted book banning and restrictions continues to intensify. Banned Book Week, sponsored annually by the ALA, is promoted in libraries around the country via table displays, posters, essay contests, and other events highlighting contested works. Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, says “I’ve never seen anything like this… It used to be a parent had learned about a given book and had an issue with it. Now, we see campaigns where organizations are compiling lists of books, without necessarily reading or even looking at them.”

Inappropriate Library Books for Minors Are Not New

We have to go back to the mid-’70s to find out what the Supreme Court said about “book banning” in K–12 local schools. I n October 1981, SCOTUS agreed to review a case stemming from a decision by the school board of Island Trees, Long Island, to remove nine books from its libraries and curriculum. According to one of the board’s press releases, the books were “anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic (sic) and just plain filthy.” In 1980, a Federal Court of Appeals declared it was “permissible and appropriate” for local school boards “to make decisions based upon their personal, social, political, and moral views.” The court thereby upheld a 1977 ban by the school board in Warsaw, Indiana, against five books, including Sylvia Plath’s novel “The Bell Jar.” 

In the end, in Island Trees School District v. Pico , t he Justices were unable to come to a majority agreement and instead issued what is known as a “plurality” opinion, in which some combination of justices signed on to three different opinions in order to render an outcome. The standard from Pico is that school officials may not remove books from the school library simply because they dislike the ideas in the book. However, school officials may remove a book from a school library if it is inappropriate for the children of the school. 

Significantly, there are no clear federal laws that specify what rights school boards or local governments have to decide what books will be available in school or public libraries. That is one reason the Supreme Court agreed to review the Island Trees case—as a way of sorting out the conflicting rights of local authorities and readers. 

It’s Always About the Money

Curriculum companies have much to gain if these additional books are available and promoted in the school library for students and school staff to supplement their narrative. The campaign to rid libraries of anti-family literature in the name of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice is just one initiative of the progressive plan. Parents, censored by their school boards, are not giving up. They are laying the groundwork for a program to inspire local communities to take back control of their school districts.

Communities Should Decide What Books Students Can Read, Not Divisive Politicians

By Allan and Sheri Rivlin  – CEO and President of Zen Political Research

Throughout our history, Americans have been able to find common ground resolutions to our differences through respectful discourse, creative problem-solving, and tolerance for our different points of view. Recently, however, our politics has become dominated by adversarial standoffs between extreme positions and efforts to delegitimize opponents’ (real or imagined) agendas to destroy American values and threaten the safety of “our” children and families.

Improving our schools now needs less political strife and more collaboration. Parents, teachers, and librarians, working as a collaborative team, are best equipped to steer individual students away from books that may be inappropriate for their stage of development, and toward books that may answer their individual inquiries and, more generally, expand their knowledge base.

Defined by Division

Throughout our history, we have been a nation defined by our divisions; the first battles over slavery, then over segregation, were joined at the start of the 20 th Century by battles over the right of men to drink alcohol, and the right of women to vote. Our recent book , “Divided We Fall: Why Consensus Matters”, details how the modern political system rewards groups that take uncompromising and extreme positions. Often, these differences have taken the form of fights over what books are available in bookstores and libraries. Many books have drawn opposition for including sexual relationships, relationships between people of different races, and relationships between people of the same gender. The controversies reflect deeply held divisions over religion and morality and are so varied that it is impossible to define criteria to determine what books are appropriate for adults or minors to read at each stage in their development. 

Because we cannot agree on the “what”, we continue to battle on the question of “who” should decide. What should be the role of students, parents, teachers, librarians, and school administrators, in deciding what books are appropriate for each child to read? What should be the role of elected politicians serving on Boards of Education, State Legislators, and Governors? Students are in a special category because they are minors, so parents will always be legally responsible for all the important decisions in their lives.

There is No Enemy, Just a Different Point of View

Suzanne Gallagher claims to represent all parents, but she only represents some. She represents those who agree with her, in opposition to parents who hold a different political, religious, or moral view. The American right to free assembly is guaranteed by the First Amendment, so we applaud her efforts to support parents who believe their rights are not being respected. We take issue with any group that defines the agenda of another group as evil, extreme, and a dangerous threat. The people who oppose book banning are none of these things, they are parents who are motivated by the desire for our schools to be non-threatening, supportive environments for their child’s growth and exploration.

Your opponents across the room in your school or school district meetings about book banning may not be the Gender Queer, Marxist, Black Lives Matter activist you imagine you are fighting. With more than 80% of Americans telling a 2022 CBS News Poll that they oppose book banning, the parents speaking against banning a particular book from a particular library may be a Democrat, Republican, or political independent who cares about the learning environment for their child who may be white, black, or some other race; Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheist, or some other faith; gay, straight, or uncertain, as they look to develop their personal expression of their individuality.

Complex and Unpleasant Truths

The traditional liberal point of view is that heterogeneity of thought is far less dangerous than homogeneity of thought and that students, parents, and teachers should be aligned in the process of exposing students to new ideas at the appropriate age for each student. Liberals believe the real world is full of complexity and unpleasant truths, American history includes greatness as well as great tragedy, and human sexuality arrives in diverse forms as early as middle school with the potential to cause great joy as well as great harm to students’ developing identities. It is important that our schools and libraries reflect these values as well. 

We Need to Apply the Penthouse Standard to K-12 Schools

By Asra Q. Nomani – Journalist, Education Advocate, and Author of “Woke Army”

As a journalist and author, I love books. As an immigrant from India at the age of four, my best friend later became Nancy Drew, the fictional detective whose adventures I adored. At 18, I got my first internship at Harper’s Magazine after scouring the magazines in my hometown library in Morgantown, W.V., and cold calling the magazine’s office. The editor who interviewed me told me she loved a profile I had written for West Virginia University’s Daily Athenaeum of the hippie activist, Abbie Hoffman, and hired me on the spot.

All my life, I’ve been a classic liberal and for most of my life voted Democrat. As an American Muslim author, I’ve written books about women’s rights and sexual rights, including a book about Tantra, which includes a meditative form of sex. These were adult manifestos with themes of liberation and social justice. This is to say, I am neither a prude nor do I clutch pearls that I do not wear.

Activists Have Hijacked the Kids’ Book Industry and Libraries

But starting in the summer of 2020, I saw books suddenly weaponized to bring activism, age-inappropriate content, and indoctrination into the hands of children whose brains had not yet developed cognitively enough to understand the big words, ideas, and manipulations on the pages in front of them. I became a leader in the movement to draw attention to these books and advocate for parents’ rights. And I watched as organizations I had once supported as neutral caretakers of the well-being and spirit of children—groups like the American Library Association and PEN International—become hijacked by activists ready to ditch the very concept of age-appropriateness in the name of wokeness. And by drawing attention to these issues, we the parents were indulging in “book banning.” 

The problem with that label is that it is a lie. I bought these books to read them myself and, disturbed by the transparent inappropriateness of their messages, I have carried them with me. From the midtown Manhattan studio of journalist John Stossel to the set of CNN in Washington, D.C., and the green room of talk show host Dr. Phil in Los Angeles,  I carry these books with me because you have to see this age-inappropriate content to believe it. I know them by heart. They foment schisms for children before they have even had time to develop their “sense of self,” the critical psychological scaffolding that gives them resilience, balance, and clarity as children and adults.

The Penthouse Standard In K-12 Schools is Commonsense

There’s a reason you don’t find Penthouse or Playboy in the school library though surely many cisgender, heterosexual boys would love to have them as manuals of sexual instruction. How exactly, then, do activists justify books that teach race hate and indulge in pornography at the same time they serve as agents of grooming and state-sponsored indoctrination? This, from the same crowd that cheers when Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and Little House on the Prairie are expunged from libraries because they offend modern sensibilities. Or when editors changed the works of Roald Dahl to make them politically correct. 

Next time activists and ideologues cry, “Stop book banning,” they should take a long look in the mirror. And they should leave kids alone. 

Opponents of Book Banning Motivated Not by “Grooming” But to Safeguard Democracy

We appreciate that Ms. Nomani takes pains to assure readers that she is not an extremist when it comes to books, free expression of unpopular ideas, or human sexuality. It is best when people discuss political differences as people rather than as caricatures of their views by their opponents. As for ourselves, we are not Marxist revolutionaries, supporters of Antifa, or members of the “Woke Army” Ms. Nomani describes in her book. We are not leftist activists that “exploit the ideas in ‘critical race theory’” as “a form of cultural Marxism.” Rather, we  wrote a book calling for respectful dialogue and bipartisan compromise as necessary to healing our divided nation, creating an alternative to the hyperpartisan stalemates and standoffs that hamper legislative achievement and problem-solving. 

There is a video in one of Ms. Nomani’s recent Substack posts that purports to show a Virginia mother politely reading from “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe and sharing the illustrations that she believes are pornographic with the Fairfax County Public School Board until she is interrupted by a series of board members and prevented from completing her speech. We oppose the rudeness in the video and we regret the interruptions. Although we do not know what provocations preceded the events in the video, we do know that activists can both give and receive verbal abuse, but we would call on all parties to look for non-confrontational solutions. This Virginia mother claims she found the book in her child’s school library. Perhaps she could have discussed her concerns with the librarian to understand the librarian’s position on the book and whether it is assigned reading for any class? Is there a solution that would not force children to read this book against their parents’ wishes, but also not restrict access for students whose parents support freedom of expression? Does “leave kids alone” go in both directions?

Many progressives view book banning with great suspicion because it is so closely associated with authoritarianism throughout human history. In a nation still suffering the traumatic violence of the January 6 th Capitol insurrection, many Americans are taking the view that they must act to safeguard American democracy. Efforts to ban books are fairly or unfairly being opposed by some Americans motivated, not by an agenda to groom children for depravity, but simply to maintain the free flow of ideas in our American democracy. 

Freedom of Speech Does Not Apply When Exposing Minors to Obscenity

President Ronald Reagan formed a Commission to study the serious effects of obscenity and child pornography in the US, and signed legislation isolating child pornography as a criminal offense in 1984. By legal definition, minors are exposed to pornography in K–12 schools and libraries daily. Graphic descriptions of sexual activities are made available to students via Comprehensive Sexuality Education K–12 curriculum and obscenity depicting body parts and sexual behaviors is offered as a means of “safe sex.”

Yet, exemptions to anti-obscenity laws passed by 43 state legislatures make it legal for teachers and librarians to display obscene materials to minors without parental knowledge or consent. Educators have the legal freedom to use materials that would otherwise be illegal if any other adult showed them to another’s child.  For example, Oregon law states that a person convicted of displaying or showing a minor obscene and/or sexually explicit material can be fined up to $10,000 unless the individual is a public school teacher acting in a professional role. Every state’s laws are different. However, until these Obscenity Exemption laws are repealed, it will become impossible to remove legally obscene materials.

Who passed and defended these destructive laws? Sexualizing children is big business, and public schools are the distribution centers. Parents won’t quit defending their rights. It ends here.

Don’t Conflate Book Banning with Age Appropriateness

By Asra Q. Nomani –  Journalist, Education Advocate, and Author of “Woke Army”

Those who claim to champion civil discourse ironically weaponize the term “book banning” to conflate it with the critical and very real issue of age appropriateness. This is particularly true when it comes to dealing with the prickly matters of gender and sexuality and the school library. For starters, parents—not schools, teachers and guidance counselors—are the natural arbiters of the timeline on which such matters are exposed to their children. “New ideas,” as the Rivlins describe them, that may be fine for a sixth grader can be totally inappropriate for a third grader.

The argument that this is really not parents’ business is elitist, wrong, and misguided. The parent-child bond is sacred and the fallout and brunt of inappropriate-age exposure is not felt by the school librarian or principal but on the home front. That’s why a book like “Gender Queer”—with pornographic passages and sexually explicit illustrations—has no place in the middle school library. That parents feel this way doesn’t mean we embrace “book banning.” Parents who may think it appropriate can buy it for their children. Meanwhile, we know for a fact that many of the same so-called progressives who shame parents as “book banners” bowdlerize “Dr. Seuss” books and cast them out of schools because of words and cultural attitudes that don’t conform to their norms. Apparently, they’re in favor of banning certain books and ideas—as long as they can make the rules. 

It is parents who see most clearly what is healthy and age-inappropriate for their babes whom they tuck into bed each night. That is not “authoritarianism,” as the Rivlins state, that is healthy parenting and love.

This debate is being published in collaboration with The Impact Guild , a professional network for people who create, use, or distribute media, arts, or entertainment for social good or healthy democracy.  If you enjoyed this debate, you can read more Political Pen Pal debates here . 

Suzanne Gallagher

Suzanne Gallagher has served as the Director of Parents’ Rights In Education since 2018. Prior to this role, she was a corporate executive, business owner, and president of Oregon Eagle Forum, motivating hundreds of people to attend school board meetings defending parents’ rights. Suzanne has served as a citizen lobbyist in the Oregon state capitol on many issues related to education policy.

Sheri Rivlin and Allan Rivlin

Sheri Rivlin and Allan Rivlin are the CEO and president, respectively, of Zen Political Research, a public opinion, marketing research, and communications strategy consulting firm founded in 2015. They are the son and daughter-in-law of Alice M. Rivlin, and since she passed away in 2019, they have been working to complete her final manuscript, “Divided We Fall, Why Consensus Matters” was published in October 2022 by Brookings Press.

Asra Nomani

Asra Q. Nomani is a senior contributor to The Federalist, senior fellow in the practice of journalism at Independent Women's Network, and and former reporter for the Wall Street Journal. A former professor of journalism at Georgetown University, she leads the Pearl Project, which investigated the murder of her colleague and friend, Daniel Pearl. She is author of “Woke Army: The Red-Green Alliance That Is Destroying America's Freedom" and "Standing Alone: An American Woman's Struggle for the Soul of Islam." She is cofounder of the Coalition for TJ, advocating for parent's rights in education.

Yeah but personally, I like the standard where if the book can’t be read in its entirety at a school board meeting, it flat out shouldn’t be in a school library. I absolutely support banning books from the public school system which don’t meet that standard. Not everything which gets published has value, and given that the funds used to purchase these books come from the public purse, we should be taking a _very_ conservative standpoint on content fit for the public. If people want more questionable materials, let them buy those items themselves and host their own private libraries for those materials.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Discover more from divided we fall.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

• Fahrenheit 451

Ray Bradbury

• Literature Notes
• The Issue of Censorship and Fahrenheit 451
• Book Summary
• About Fahrenheit 451
• Character List
• Summary and Analysis
• Character Analysis
• Captain Beatty
• Clarisse McClellan
• Professor Faber
• Mildred Montag
• The Mechanical Hound
• Character Map
• Ray Bradbury Biography
• Critical Essays
• Dystopian Fiction and Fahrenheit 451
• Comparison of the Book and Film Versions of Fahrenheit 451
• Ray Bradbury's Fiction
• Full Glossary for Fahrenheit 451
• Essay Questions
• Practice Projects
• Cite this Literature Note

Critical Essays The Issue of Censorship and Fahrenheit 451

Bradbury ties personal freedom to the right of an individual having the freedom of expression when he utilizes the issue of censorship in  Fahrenheit 451 . The First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances.

The common reading of the First Amendment is that commitment to free speech is not the acceptance of only non-controversial expressions that enjoy general approval. To accept a commitment to the First Amendment means, in the words of Justice Holmes, "freedom for what we hate." As quoted in Students' Right to Read (NCTE, 1982), "Censorship leaves students with an inadequate and distorted picture of the ideals, values, and problems of their culture. Writers may often be the spokesmen of their culture, or they may stand to the side, attempting to describe and evaluate that culture. Yet, partly because of censorship or the fear of censorship, many writers are ignored or inadequately represented in the public schools, and many are represented in anthologies not by their best work but by their safest or least offensive work." What are the issues involved in censorship?

Imagine that a group wants to ban Fahrenheit 451 because Montag defies authority. For the sake of the argument, assume for a moment that you wish to "ban" Fahrenheit 451 from the library shelves. To do so, you must do a number of things. First, you must establish why defying authority is wrong. What are its consequences? What are the probable effects on youth to see flagrant disregard of authority? (In regard to these questions, you may want to read Plato's Apology to get a sense of how to argue the position.) Second, you must have some theory of psychology, either implied or directly stated. That is, you must establish how a reading of Fahrenheit 451 would inspire a student to flagrantly disregard authority. Why is reading bad for a student? How can it be bad? Next, you must establish how a student who reads Fahrenheit 451 will read the book and extract from it a message that says "Defy Authority Whenever Possible" and then act on this message.

You must then reconcile whatever argument you construct with the responsibilities that accompany accepting the rights of the First Amendment. Perhaps you should consider and think about the issues of free speech and fundamental rights that you may not have considered before. Indeed, you may conclude that you can't claim your own right to expression if you have the right to suppress others rights to express themselves.

In looking at censorship in Fahrenheit 451 , Bradbury sends a very direct message showing readers what can happen if they allow the government to take total control of what they do (or do not) read, watch, and discuss. For example, the government in Fahrenheit 451 has taken control and demanded that books be given the harshest measure of censorship — systematic destruction by burning.

Although the books and people have fallen victims to censorship in Fahrenheit 451 , luckily, some citizens remain who are willing to sacrifice their lives to ensure that books remain alive. As Faber notes in a conversation with Montag, "It's not books you need, it's some of the things that once were in books." Faber then continues this conversation with Montag pointing out that people need "the right to carry out actions based on what we learn [from books]. . . ."

Because the government has censored so much in its society, the citizens in Fahrenheit 451 have no idea about what is truly happening in their world. A direct result of their limited knowledge is that their entire city is destroyed because propaganda wouldn't allow individuals to see that their destruction was imminent.

Previous Dystopian Fiction and Fahrenheit 451

Next Comparison of the Book and Film Versions of Fahrenheit 451

Censorship and Banned Books Proposal

Introduction, intellectual development through literature, literary censorship, detrimental effects of literary censorship, importance of including the grapes of wrath, reference list.

Literature has always played a vital role in educating young minds it acts as the seed of ideas, the fount of inspiration and the basis by which children develop their own unique way of looking at the world. On the other hand it can also be said that literature can act as a constraining force in a person’s life.

By limiting the type and amount of literature a person receives during their formative years of learning they can develop ideas which are overly focused on a single train of thought, less adaptive and imaginative and constrain rather than facilitate their interaction with the broad range of topics, lessons and individuals that they will encounter over the course of their academic learning experience.

It was actually noted by childhood development researchers such as () that children who are overly coddled by their parents actually develop into individuals that are less independent, more likely to be socially inept and developed personality characteristics that are detrimental towards their continued growth as independent individuals (Rosenbaum, 1991).

Taking this particular viewpoint into consideration, it can be seen that to limit the types of books a child is allowed to learn is the same as coddling them which results in a child that has a limited literary background from which he can draw from in order to interpret and understand the world him.

Childhood educational researchers such as Molenda and Bhavnagri (2009) state that introducing children to a broad range of literary topics early on helps them to develop a certain degree of mental acuity in understanding a broader range of topics ranging from environmental degradation to social conditions, economic realities and even human suffering (Molenda & Bhavnagri, 2009).

In fact it was proven by Sackes, Trundle and Flevares (2009) that children introduced to a broad range of literature often performed better in academics as compared to children that had a limited degree of exposure to various forms of literature (Sackes, Trundle & Flevares, 2009).

When introduced to new literary topics which help to pique their interest children begin to develop a certain “hunger” to learn and explore and as such facilitates a greater degree of academic accomplishment which carries on later in their life (Gutman, 2010).

It is based on the facts presented that the necessity for literary freedom becomes obvious since through it children will benefit through the attainment of a broader viewpoint regarding various real life topics and will be able to develop a certain degree of intellectual maturity.

On the other hand it has been argued by various parental groups that a certain degree of censorship is necessary when it comes to certain types of literature pertaining to either overtly sexual or violent themes.

Such arguments were also initially presented during the introduction of sexual educational classes within various schools throughout the U.S. however it was noted that educating kids regarding the possible dangers associated with sexual intercourse was far better than allowing them to explore on their own and thus bring about untold ramifications (i.e. early parenthood, spread of sexually transmitted diseases etc.).

While this paper does acknowledge the fact that certain types of types of literature are “improper” for young children, parents need to realize the fact that most teachers know what they’re doing and the lessons they create through various forms of literary works are for the benefit of their children and as such it makes little sense to implement forms of censorship.

What must be understood is that literary censorship limits the ability of a teacher to expand the way in which children view the world.

For example, works such as the Tale of Two Cities, the Three Musketeers and Jonathan Livingston Seagull help to develop a certain degree of positivity in children in that they teach them lessons related to self-improvement, doing what’s right and the necessity of cooperation yet such literary works fail to address the other half of what people experience namely anger, revenge, crime and despair.

Works such as the Giver, the Count of Monte Cristo and even Eleanor Updale’s Montmorency series which details the various criminal exploits of the main character help to balance what children learn.

It is balance that is necessary in giving children a proper literary education so as to impart the lesson that things don’t always go according plan, that there are many ways in which to arrive at a solution and that in this world there is both good and evil yet the lines between them are often obscured (Gutman, 2010).

By creating a balance children are able to understand the world in a broader context and as such are able to make more informed choices regarding their lives which in the end is of paramount importance as they continue to grow and develop.

It is at this point in my argument for literary freedom that I would like to point why the book “Grapes of Wrath” by John Steinbeck is a necessary part of my curriculum. Due to the housing crisis that began in 2008 within the country million of Americans have been affected by economic hardship, the need to cutback in certain costs and even face the possibility of economic destitution.

The scale of this problem is not to be underestimated and it is very likely that several of children within my class have families or know someone that has been affected by financial recession. It must be noted though that children are often unaware of what economic recessions are, what it means to survive through such hardships and the need to adapt to changing economic environments.

The story of the Grapes of Wrath will help children to broaden their understanding of the connection between problems that happen within economies and how this affects family units resulting in them being able to understand the degree of worry and apprehension that is currently affecting either their parents or those they know have been affected.

This enables them to cope with what is happening with their family and to understand the necessity of reduced luxuries and treats due to the need to survive (Swick & Williams, 2010). What must be understood is that children should be made aware of problems and not be thought of as “being too young to understand” it is actually quite surprising what children area capable of understanding at even a young age.

Through understanding comes a certain degree of realization and intellectual maturity which will serve them well as they continue to grow and develop.

Aside from it’s importance in relation to a real and present scenario the books helps to gradually reveal to children various mature themes such as murder, still birth, death and abandonment. While it may be true that such themes are considered by parents as being “too early” to be introduced to children I say it is a necessity to have them understand the various realities that surround them.

It is naive to think that all the children within a classroom are living an ideal life. Though it may not be obvious some of them have gone through the exact same things as seen in the novel. Some of them were abandoned by their fathers or brothers, relatives have died, baby brothers or sisters never same home from this hospital or that they have experienced a certain degree of financial destitution.

By teaching them of how characters in the book cope with the situations that they themselves endured these kids will be able to realize that there are other ways of looking at what happened to them, that they can still be who they choose to be, that there are still other avenues for them to pursue and that their live is not dictated by events but rather what they choose to be (Gutman, 2010).

Grapes of Wrath helps children to develop a certain awareness of despair, suffering, and pain yet through this they come to understand the world a little bit better, are able to empathize when someone experienced what they read in the book and are able to bring what they learned into their lives and improve they way in which they themselves are able to cope with problems (Swick & Williams, 2010).

It is from this that it can be seen that literature is an avenue by which children learn and mature. It gives them the ability to see beyond the obvious and understand the underlying nature of things and through this they grow and develop into responsible and intellectually flexible adults.

Based on what has been presented in this paper so far it can be seen that literary freedom is an important facilitator in helping children develop a certain degree of intellectual maturity by broadening their understanding of the world and the various ways in which it works.

Instituting measures of literary censorship not only reduces their capacity to learn but limits them to only a particular way of thinking which will not serve them well as they continue to mature and develop.

Children need to understand both the good and the bad in life, they don’t need to be coddled forever, rather it is at times necessary for them to understand how the world really is and as a result develop their own unique and independent way of viewing it.

Gutman, D. (2010). How I Corrupted America’s Youth. School Library Journal , 56(5), 28-31. Retrieved from EBSCO host .

Molenda, C., & Bhavnagri, N. (2009). Cooperation Through Movement Education and Children’s Literature. Early Childhood Education Journal , 37(2), 153-159.

Rosenbaum, A. A. (1991). The spoiled child. UNESCO Courier , 44(10), 32. Retrieved from EBSCO host .

Sackes, M., Trundle, K., & Flevares, L. (2009). Using Children’s Literature to Teach Standard-Based Science Concepts in Early Years. Early Childhood Education Journal , 36(5), 415-422

Swick, K., & Williams, R. (2010). The Voices of Single Parent Mothers Who are Homeless: Implications for Early Childhood Professionals. Early Childhood Education Journal , 38(1), 49-55.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, September 27). Censorship and Banned Books. https://ivypanda.com/essays/censorship-and-banned-books-proposal/

"Censorship and Banned Books." IvyPanda , 27 Sept. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/censorship-and-banned-books-proposal/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Censorship and Banned Books'. 27 September.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Censorship and Banned Books." September 27, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/censorship-and-banned-books-proposal/.

1. IvyPanda . "Censorship and Banned Books." September 27, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/censorship-and-banned-books-proposal/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Censorship and Banned Books." September 27, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/censorship-and-banned-books-proposal/.

• Evaluation of the Movie: The Grapes of Wrath
• Literature: The Grapes of Wrath and As I Lay Dying
• The Grapes of Wrath: Movie Analysis
• Theme Analysis: The Grapes of Wrath
• Steinback's "The Grapes of Wrath" and Faulkner's "As I Lay Dying"
• John Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath" and the Great Depression
• "Grapes of Wrath” and People During Great Depression
• "The Grapes of Wrath" the Novel by John Steinbeck
• Intercalary Chapters in Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath
• Censorship in the United States
• Mix Methods Analysis in “Seeing From a Different Angle: The Role of Pop Culture in Teaching for Diversity and Critical Media Literacy in Adult Education”
• Educational Leadership in School
• Scientific Knowledge: Is It Dangerous for Politics to Define Science?
• How Can School Prayer Possibly Hurt?
• Education and Identity

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Attempts to Ban Books Accelerated Last Year

Book challenges around the country reached the highest levels ever recorded by a library organization.

By Alexandra Alter

After several years of rising book bans, censorship efforts continued to surge last year, reaching the highest levels ever recorded by the American Library Association.

Last year, 4,240 individual titles were targeted for removal from libraries, up from 2,571 titles in 2022 , according to a report released Thursday by the association.

Those figures likely fail to capture the full scale of book removals, as many go unreported. The American Library Association, which has tracked book bans for more than 20 years, compiles data from book challenges that library professionals reported to the group and information gathered from news reports.

“I wake up every morning hoping this is over,” said Emily Drabinski, the president of the organization. “What I find striking is that this is still happening, and it’s happening with more intensity.”

The stark rise in book challenges comes as libraries around the United States have emerged as a battleground in a culture war over what constitutes appropriate reading material. While book bans aren’t new, censorship efforts have become increasingly organized and politicized, with the rise of conservative groups like Moms for Liberty and Utah Parents United, which encourage their members to file complaints about books they deem inappropriate and have lobbied for legislation that regulates the content of library collections.

Some librarians and free speech advocacy groups are also alarmed by the rise in book removals and challenges at public libraries. Book challenges at public libraries rose by 92 percent in 2023 compared to the previous year, totaling 1,761 individual titles. In school libraries, challenges rose by 11 percent, according to the report.

“What we’re seeing is absolute evidence that there is actually an organized effort to remove particular books from both school libraries and public libraries,” said Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the library association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom. “They are targeting the same titles with the same tactics, these mass challenges.”

Disputes over what books belong in library collections have divided communities and school boards, and have led to attacks on librarians , who have increasingly come under scrutiny for the books in their collections. Some librarians have faced accusations that they provide pornography and have been harassed online by people calling for their firing or even arrest. Some libraries that have refused to remove books have been threatened with a loss in funding.

Librarians and school districts are now seeing more complaints that demand the removal of multiple titles, sometimes dozens or even hundreds of books, according to the library association’s report.

The spike in book removals also stems in part from new legislation that aims to regulate the content of libraries. Last year, more than a dozen states passed laws that targeted libraries, sometimes by imposing restrictions on the types of materials they can stock or by exposing librarians to criminal penalties if they fail to comply, according to an analysis by EveryLibrary, a political action committee for libraries.

Many of the titles that drew challenges feature L.G.B.T.Q. characters, or deal with race and racism, the American Library Association said. Such books accounted for nearly 50 percent of challenges, according to the report. The same titles often get targeted in libraries around the country; in recent years, some of the most challenged books have included classics like Toni Morrison’s “The Bluest Eye” and Margaret Atwood’s “The Handmaid’s Tale,” popular young adult titles like John Green’s “Looking for Alaska,” and works with L.G.B.T.Q. themes like Juno Dawson’s “This Book Is Gay” and Maia Kobabe’s “Gender Queer.”

In response to growing book bans, some free speech organizations, publishers, authors , booksellers and library groups have launched a counter movement. Some have joined lawsuits that challenge legislation that has led to the rise in book removals. Around 20 states have introduced legislation that aims to protect the “right to read,” sometimes by ensuring that libraries are able to curate collections without externally imposed limitations, according to Caldwell-Stone.

“My sincere hope is that we aren’t talking about this in a year, that we’ll see a growing understanding that libraries need to serve everyone,” Caldwell-Stone said. “There’s always going to be books on the shelves that we might not agree with, but they’re there for another reader.”

Alexandra Alter writes about books, publishing and the literary world for The Times. More about Alexandra Alter

Faculty Scholarship

What would benjamin franklin do…about social media.

Harvard Law expert Timothy Edgar outlines the arguments in Murthy v. Missouri and urges the Supreme Court to be guided by the famous founder

According to President Ronald Reagan, “the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’” The attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana tend to agree, at least when it comes to federal government involvement in social media platforms’ content moderation policies. But what would the U.S. Constitution’s drafters, including Benjamin Franklin, think? 

On March 18, the justices will hear oral arguments in a case, Murthy v. Missouri , in which the two states and several individuals claim that federal officials violated the First Amendment in their efforts to “help” social media companies combat mis- and disinformation about COVID-19 and other matters. In what they label a “sprawling ‘Censorship Enterprise,’” the parties that filed the suit contend that the Biden administration has effectively coerced the platforms into muzzling the voices of Americans, particularly conservatives, who question public health pronouncements about the pandemic or the efficacy of vaccines. 

This is one of several landmark social media cases the Court is hearing this term, including Lindke v. Freed  and  O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier , in which they will decide if and when government officials may block private citizens from commenting on their personal social media accounts. The justices’ rulings in these and other cases could transform the way government may regulate the conduct of social media behemoths. 

Former national security official and current Harvard Law lecturer, Timothy Edgar ’97 , believes that both the states and the federal government have valid arguments, and argues that the justices should channel the spirit of that famous 18th century publisher and postmaster, Benjamin Franklin, who was a proponent of both neutrality and rational discourse. Harvard Law Today recently spoke to Edgar about the case, the arguments on both sides, the legal precedents, and what one of America’s most famous founders might do.  

Harvard Law Today: What is this case about?

Timothy Edgar : This case is about whether the government can be involved in content moderation decisions. And it’s a very important case for social media because social media relies on content moderation. But when the government gets involved, there’s very serious issues about censorship and freedom of speech.

HLT : And what are the states and individuals that sued the federal government arguing?  

Edgar: Missouri among other states and individuals are arguing that the Biden administration’s involvement in trying to suppress COVID-19 misinformation, especially about vaccines, crossed the line from being public health education to being censorship, by proxy. They argue that the administration was making very aggressive, specific suggestions to those social media companies, either to remove or to downgrade certain kinds of posts, and that by doing that, they transformed the private decisions that those companies made — principally Facebook and Twitter, now X — into public decisions, and that would amount to censorship. 

HLT: How does the Biden administration respond?  

Edgar: The federal government says this was a voluntary, cooperative effort between social media and the government to combat misinformation and improve public health. They also argue that the government has long engaged in public health education and that even if the government expresses its views bluntly, it has a responsibility to express those views. The First Amendment and concerns about censorship, they say, don’t prevent the government from expressing an opinion about what information is or isn’t truthful when it comes to public health, or to tell a social media platform, “We think that under your policies, you should be taking action to combat this misinformation.”  

HLT: Who has the better argument, in your view?   

Edgar: My opinion is that they’re both right and that we need to get some clarity from the courts about where that line is between engagement and public health or other issues as well, such as terrorism, online radicalization, efforts to remove child sexual abuse material, and a whole range of other public policy issues that involve content moderation on social media. We need guidance from the courts about what communications are okay, and what communications cross the line. 

HLT: Is there existing tradition or jurisprudence on this question that the justices can turn to? I realize that Chief Justice John Marshall was not dealing with questions about social media content moderation in the first decades of the 19th century.  

Edgar: Since you mentioned Marshall, I can’t resist telling you about my class, “ Legal Problems in Cybersecurity ” and our recent discussion on the topic of disinformation, which began with a quote from Benjamin Franklin. In his early days, Franklin was a printer in Philadelphia and a postmaster. When he was criticized by a number of the citizens of Philadelphia for publishing a controversial essay, Franklin wrote a famous response called “ An Apology for Printers ,” which is a defense of the idea that printers should be neutral. Here’s the quote: “Printers are educated in the Belief, that when Men differ in Opinion, both Sides ought equally to have the Advantage of being heard by the Publick; and that when Truth and Error have fair Play, the former is always an overmatch for the latter: Hence they chearfully serve all contending Writers that pay them well, without regarding on which side they are of the Question in Dispute.”  

Franklin was defending the idea that there’s a role for service providers — publishers, printers, platforms — to share information and arguing that, if we say that they must agree with everything that’s on their service, then we cut off debate. It is an argument grounded in an enlightenment faith in the idea of rational discourse. Of course, it doesn’t answer the question of whether we should print literally everything — which Franklin did not believe — or when and how platforms should moderate content. But it embodies a certain faith in the marketplace of ideas.  

Franklin is making two arguments in his essay. One is the enlightenment idea of rational debate: that the truth will win out. But it also has this very pragmatic point, which is that neutrality is good for business. Printers were natural monopolies in a way that social media platforms can be as well. Printers had expensive equipment, and the market couldn’t support many printers of differing beliefs, even in a relatively large city or town like Philadelphia. So, to serve the public, you need a platform — a printing shop and now a digital platform — that maintains some level of neutrality in order to have a democratic system of government.  

“Franklin was defending the idea that there’s a role for service providers — publishers, printers, platforms — to share information and arguing that, if we say that they must agree with everything that’s on their service, then we cut off debate.”  

HLT: How about legal precedents?  

Edgar: There are precedents from the pre-digital era. The most important is a case called Bantam Books v. Sullivan , from 1963, which involved government communications to book publishers that were selling what state officials considered “objectionable” books because they were inappropriate for minors. The state urged “cooperation” and reminded booksellers of the potential for prosecution if the books were later found to be obscene. The publishers sued and won on the argument that those communications were a form of censorship, not voluntary cooperation. They crossed a line. So, we know that there is a line. When the government communicates with distributors of information, in that case, book publishers, if they do it in a way that makes those businesses feel like they have no choice but to comply, then those actions will be seen as government actions. And they will be seen as a form of censorship that is prohibited by the First Amendment unless there’s some legal basis for censorship, in other words, unless the content is illegal. So, that’s a good precedent to apply here. But it doesn’t answer a lot of questions about where that line actually is. Attempts by lower courts to apply the Bantam Books standard in the digital age have been a bit messy. 

HLT: The essay you cited from Ben Franklin seems particularly apt because, if I remember the history correctly, it was a very young Franklin who helped his older brother publish arguments against the idea of smallpox vaccinations, which Cotton Mather was urging but many in the Boston establishment opposed.  

Edgar: You got it exactly right. It was very early in Franklin’s career. Franklin was born in Boston and very famously he skipped out on his apprenticeship before it was done and hightailed it to Philadelphia, where he made his way. During his time in Boston, he apprenticed at his brother’s newspaper, which had taken a strong anti-inoculation stance. We know now that it was bad for public health. And Franklin, as a man of science, became a huge champion of inoculation later in life. We have writings where he deeply regretted being involved in the campaign against inoculation in Boston. That doesn’t necessarily mean that he would want the government to suppress anti-inoculation printers, but it shows you again that there’s a role for content moderation.  

HLT: So, what can we learn today from Ben Franklin about where the line might be?  

Edgar: You can look at this example from Franklin’s life and see some of both sides of what the justices will be deciding in this case. The platform should be neutral. In general, they should aspire to further public debate and that, even when they think something they allow to remain posted to the platform is wrong, they should have some faith in rational discourse. But there is a line, and the platforms or the printers can draw that line where they choose. The problem is when the government gets involved in telling those platforms where and how to draw that line. And even there, it’s more complicated because the government has the obligation to inform the public on matters where they’re the most authoritative source. And they often are the main source of reliable information, including on matters of public health.  

The government has a responsibility to inform the public and to engage with digital platforms. They may even criticize digital platforms if they feel that their moderation decisions are being driven by private profits at the expense of the public interest. In such cases, the government can call out platforms and say, “We think you’re permitting this kind of information in order to generate private profit and not because you’re trying to encourage a well-informed discussion about public health.” The government can make rational arguments. What it cannot do is to invoke its power — even implicitly — in a way that makes platforms feel they have no good option but to do what the government says.   

“[T]here’s a difference between X and Facebook and the New York Times. Platforms make content moderation decisions. The New York Times makes editorial decisions. Both are protected by the First Amendment, but they are different decisions, and different considerations apply when deciding when government pressure crosses the line.”

HLT: Right, so how does a court decide what crosses that line? Is there an established test?  

Edgar: The amicus brief filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, EFF, and the Center for Democracy and Technology, CDT, had a good recommendation: In deciding whether government has crossed the line, courts should look to the standard in Bantam Books. Lower courts have looked at several factors. One of those is transparency; are the government’s views freely accessible to the public? Or are they being privately communicated to the platforms? If the government’s views are transparent — allowing those who disagree to push back — its actions are less likely to seem coercive. Second, what kind of language did the government use? Did they say, “Hey, we want to point out there are some posts about vaccines that are misinformation, and we think they don’t comply with your community guidelines.” Or, did they say, “Take this post by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. down by tomorrow. If you don’t do it, we’re going to call you.” That is more directive language that might cross the line. Third, is the government using persuasive arguments? “Here are the reasons why this post violates your guidelines.” Or did they refer to their statutory authority, directly or indirectly, as the head of the CDC, or another public health agency? “The law gives me the responsibility to ensure public health, including through certain enforcement powers” might sound like “I’m ordering you to do this.” Fourth, are they really getting into the nitty gritty of exactly which posts they say are objectionable versus those that aren’t? Or are they giving more general guidance about what the platforms should know about the issue as they consider content moderation decisions? Finally, did the platform ask for this? Did they say, “Hey, we’d like your expertise in as we identify things that violate our guidelines? Let’s have some periodic meetings and discussions and have a channel.” Or did the government reach out and say, “We want to clean up this platform.” None of those are dispositive — they provide a multifactor balancing test — which can, of course, be fuzzy.  

HLT: Is there a way for the Court to make that multifactor balancing test less fuzzy?  

Edgar: In their amicus brief, EFF and CDT suggest that the Court should put the burden on the government to show that they didn’t cross the line. So, the government has to make sure that its communications with platforms are staying on the side of information, recommendation, education, and even criticism, but don’t cross into coercion, pressure, implied threats, or invoking authority. And if you put that burden on the government, I think that gives more teeth to this multifactor balancing test and maybe makes it a little clearer.  

In the Murthy v. Missouri case, the states describe a host of contacts between federal officials and the platforms, many of which probably fall on one side of the line and some of which on the other. And I think part of the problem is that the lower courts took a very blunderbuss approach, saying this is all unconstitutional censorship, which I think is wrong. The government has an important role and responsibility here to be engaging with private platforms, and not just on public health, but on issues of terrorism, and extremism and violence, on issues of taking down illegal content like child sexual abuse material. When there are foreign, state sponsored disinformation campaigns, the government is uniquely positioned to let the platforms know about them. So, they need to be involved with Facebook, X, Google, YouTube, all the big social media companies. It must be voluntary, but it makes a good deal of sense for the public to expect those companies to have good and productive, voluntary cooperative relationships with relevant government agencies that have expertise in these areas. But it must be very carefully done. And it must be transparent. And it must be done in a way that doesn’t cross that that important line. 

HLT: Does the type of content matter? Does the government have more or less leeway when it is an urgent matter of public health or national security compared to when the risks to health, safety, or even democracy are less obvious? I’m thinking about social media posts related to Hunter Biden’s laptop, for example.   

Edgar: Obviously, there are hot button political issues where any government involvement will raise real questions in the minds of any average American about whether this is genuinely fulfilling some important national security or other interest or whether this is protecting the president’s son, in the case you mentioned. That said, there may be legitimate national security interests involved even — or perhaps especially — in highly fraught political issues. The Russian government is going for the jugular. They’re going after the issues that affect the political debate in their efforts to influence political action with misinformation or disinformation. So, it’s heavily fact dependent on what happened in the case of, say, Hunter Biden’s laptop. If there is information about Russian involvement in promoting a story, I think that’s relevant for social media companies to know about. But you don’t want these kinds of initiatives used for political purposes, where politically damaging information or stories are flagged by the government on some pretextual ground. If it were Hunter Smith’s laptop, what approach would the government take? So again, it’s a context-based question about what happened in that case and what the government’s interest is. But I don’t think you can shy away from having this kind of involvement by the government involving foreign disinformation threats just because it’s politically fraught, because then you’d be tying your hands behind your back. Obviously, foreign based political disinformation is going to be about politically fraught issues, or else it wouldn’t be very effective. 

HLT: How about different types of platforms? Government officials and PR people jawbone journalists all the time, trying to influence what they write and publish. Newspaper op-ed pages regularly decide which opinion pieces by outside actors to print, and which not to. Is there a difference between Facebook and X and the New York Times op-ed page in the way government officials can interact with them?  

Edgar: Yes, there’s a difference between X and Facebook and the New York Times. Platforms make content moderation decisions. The New York Times makes editorial decisions. Both are protected by the First Amendment, but they are different decisions, and different considerations apply when deciding when government pressure crosses the line. And this gets back to our discussion of Benjamin Franklin. In the social media space, content moderation may deprive a speaker of the practical ability to have access to digital public square. That’s different than, say, the White House press secretary yelling at the editor of the New York Times because she doesn’t like the tenor of the paper’s editorials, or she thinks that they shouldn’t have run a particular story. Of course, if such contacts get into coercion and threat, then they do violate the First Amendment. But just in terms of the overall context, people expect government press officers to be yelling about that kind of stuff. It’s part of the editorial process. Whereas if you’re talking about the Department of Homeland Security or the intelligence community or the CDC or the Surgeon General making official statements about information that shouldn’t be out there because it’s harmful to the public, that is a different kind of pressure and could well cross the line. 

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.  

Want to stay up to date with Harvard Law Today? Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Modal Gallery