By HILLEL ITALIE and KIMBERLEE KRUESI (Associated Press)
In 2019, educators in Clayton, Missouri decided to keep illustrated copies of Margaret Atwood’s “The Handmaid’s Tale” in high school libraries without much discussion. The book is considered a classic in dystopian literature about the oppression of women, and a graphic novel version would make it more accessible to teens who struggle with reading.
However, after a law was passed in 2022 in Missouri that could make librarians face fines and even imprisonment for having sexually explicit materials on bookshelves, the Clayton district reconsidered and removed the new Atwood edition from their libraries.
Tom Bober, Clayton district’s library coordinator and president of the Missouri Association of School Librarians, explained, “There’s a depiction of a rape scene, a handmaid being forced into a sexual act. It’s just one panel in the graphic novel, but we felt it violated Missouri law.”
Book challenges and bans have increased significantly, leading to a surge in complaints from community members and conservative organizations like Moms for Liberty. Lawmakers are now considering harsher punishments such as lawsuits, heavy fines, and even imprisonment for distributing books that some people consider inappropriate.
This trend has emerged while officials are trying to define terms like “obscene” and “harmful.” Many of the disputes involve materials with themes related to race and LGBTQ+ identity, including works like Toni Morrison’s novel, “The Bluest Eye,” and Maia Kobabe’s memoir, “Gender Queer.” Although no librarian or educator has been put in prison, the threat alone has led to more self-censorship.
So far this year, more than 15 states have proposed bills to impose severe penalties on libraries or librarians.
In March, Utah passed a law that gives the state’s Attorney General the authority to enforce a new process for challenging and removing “sensitive” books from school settings. The law also establishes a panel to oversee compliance and violations.
A bill awaiting Idaho Gov. Brad Little’s approval would enable local prosecutors to press charges against public and school libraries if they don’t remove “harmful” materials from children's access.
Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, says, “The laws are designed to limit or remove legal protections that libraries have had for decades.
Since the early 1960s, schools, libraries, and museums, as well as their staff who provide materials to children, have generally been protected from costly lawsuits or potential criminal charges.
These protections started to appear as the United States dealt with issues related to obscenity, which was defined by the Supreme Court in 1973.
In the case of Miller v. California, the justices ruled 5-4 that obscene materials are not automatically protected by the First Amendment, and established three criteria for determining obscenity: whether the work, as a whole, appeals to “prurient interest,” whether “the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law,” and whether the work lacks “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”
In the end, nearly every state put in place protections for teachers, librarians, and museum staff, among others who give information to young people.
“In the past, police and prosecutors couldn't bring charges against public libraries for materials that make certain people uncomfortable. These exceptions have prevented unfair prosecutions of teachers for health and sexuality lessons, art, theater, and difficult subjects in English classes,” said a 2023 report from EveryLibrary, a national political action committee that opposes censorship.
Last year, Arkansas and Indiana passed laws making it a crime for educators and librarians to do certain things. Tennessee made it illegal for publishers to provide “obscene” materials to public schools.
Some Republicans want to create penalties and restrictions that would be national. Referring to “pornography” in the introduction to Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s plan for a potential second Donald Trump administration, the right-wing group’s president, Kevin Roberts, wrote that the “people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders.”
A federal judge temporarily stopped Arkansas’ version after a group of librarians and publishers questioned the legality of punishing librarians and booksellers for providing “harmful” materials to minors.
Indiana lawmakers removed the defense of “educational purposes” for school librarians and educators charged with giving minors “obscene” or “harmful” material — felonies punishable by up to 2½ years in jail and $10,000 in fines. The law also requires public catalogs of what’s in each school library and systems for handling complaints.
Indiana’s law became active on January 1. It’s likely that a lawsuit will be filed, and the worry has had a chilling effect.
“It’s making some people scared. It’s very frightening,” said Diane Rogers, a school librarian and president of the Indiana Library Federation. “If you’re a licensed teacher, just being charged with a felony potentially gets rid of your license even if you’re found innocent. That’s a very serious thing.”
Rogers believes Indiana’s school libraries don’t offer obscene materials, but she has heard that some districts have moved certain titles to older age groups or required parental approval to borrow them.
According to a PEN America list, 300 titles were removed from school libraries across 11 Missouri districts after lawmakers in 2022 banned “sexually explicit” material, punishable by up to a year in jail or a $2,000 fine. The American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri and library groups challenged the law last year, but it remains in effect pending a motion for the state to intervene.
“Gender Queer” is no longer available to high school students in Clayton, where district officials recently focused on Mike Curato’s graphic novel, “Flamer,” about a teenager who struggles with his sexual identity and how to fit in at Boy Scout camp. The American Library Association included “Flamer” on its list of 2023’s most challenged and/or banned books.
Bober said they had many discussions about understanding the law without breaking it. They also didn't want to censor their collections too much. They didn't think they were breaking the law with 'Flamer.'
