╌>

Judge orders books removed from Texas public libraries due to LGBTQ and racial content must be replaced within 24 hours | CNN

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  jbb  •  last year  •  63 comments

By:   Alaa Elassar,Taylor Romine,Andy Rose (CNN)

Judge orders books removed from Texas public libraries due to LGBTQ and racial content must be replaced within 24 hours | CNN
A federal judge in Texas ruled that at least 12 books removed from public libraries by Llano County officials, many because of their LGBTQ and racial content, must be placed back onto shelves within 24 hours, according to an order filed Thursday.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



US District Judge Robert Pitman ruled that at least 12 books removed from public libraries must be placed back onto shelves within 24 hours. Courtney Sacco/Odessa American/AP CNN —

A federal judge in Texas ruled that at least 12 books removed from public libraries by Llano County officials, many because of their LGBTQ and racial content, must be placed back onto shelves within 24 hours, according to an order filed Thursday.

Seven residents sued county officials in April 2022, claiming their First and 14th Amendment rights were violated when books deemed inappropriate by some people in the community and Republican lawmakers were removed from public libraries or access was restricted.

The lawsuitfiled in the US District Court for the Western District of Texas in San Antonioclaimed county officials removed books from the shelves of the three-branch public library system "because they disagree with the ideas within them" and terminated access to thousands of digital books because they could not ban two specific titles.

Books ordered to return to shelves include "Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents" by Isabel Wilkerson, "They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group" by Susan Campbell Bartoletti and "Being Jazz: My Life as a (Transgender) Teen" by Jazz Jennings.

The library system also is required to reflect these books as available in their catalog and cannot remove any books for any reason while the case is ongoing, US District Judge Robert Pitman said in his order.

"Although libraries are afforded great discretion for their selection and acquisition decisions, the First Amendment prohibits the removal of books from libraries based on either viewpoint or content discrimination," Pitman said.

The fight to protect access to books comes amid a book banning boom, with an alarming increase in attempts to censor books in K-12 schools, universities and public libraries. Many of these efforts seek to pull books with LGBTQ characters or themes and are part of a broader, conservative-led movement to chisel away at the rights and status of LGBTQ Americans.

Many of the book bans have also been aimed at authors of color exploring history, racism or their own experiences in America.

"This is a ringing victory for democracy," said Ellen Leonida, an attorney representing the plaintiffs in the Texas case. "The government cannot tell citizens what they can or can't read. Our nation was founded on the free exchange of ideas, and banning books you disagree with is a direct attack on our most basic liberties."

It wasn't immediately clear whether Llano County officials have complied with the judge's order.

Llano County Judge Ron Cunningham, county commissioners Jerry Don Moss, Peter Jones, Mike Sandoval, and Linda Raschke; library system director Amber Milum and four members of the Llano County library board, Bonnie Wallace, Rochelle Wells, Rhonda Schneider, and Gay Baskin, are named as co-defendants in the case. They did not respond to CNN requests for comment.

The defendantsargued the books were removed as part of a regular "weeding" process following the library's existing policies, but Pitman said there was clear influence from outside sources.

"Whether or not the books in fact qualified for 'weeding' under the library's existing policies, there is no real question that the targeted review was directly prompted by complaints from patrons and county officials over the contents of these titles," the judge wrote in his order.

"And, notably, there is no evidence that any of the books were slated to be reviewed for weeding prior to the receipt of these complaints; to the contrary, many other books eligible for weeding based on the same factors appear to have remained on the shelves for many years," he said.

Complaints from community groups targeted multiple books they labeled as "pornographic filth" because they promoted "acceptance of LGBTQ views," according to the order. These books were removed from the libraries, according to the order, as well as other books listed as "pornographic" that were about " 'critical race theory' and related racial themes."

In one email from community member Bonnie Wallace, who was later elected to the library board, she suggested "all the pastors to get involved in this. Perhaps they can organize a weekly prayer vigil on this specific issue. … May God protect our children from this FILTH."

County commissioners also voted to dissolve the library board and replace it with a new "Library Advisory Board" that appointed multiple Llano County residents, including Wallace, who advocated for the book removals, the order said.

The new board required all new books to "be presented to and approved" by them before purchase, and staff librarians were banned from attending the new board's meetings, according to the order.

Book bans aim to 'suppress the voices' of LGBTQ and communities of color


Dozens of books have been pulled from shelves in Texas, new policies expanding oversight of books are being drafted or already passed in multiple states, a Florida school district halted library purchases and a teacher resigned in Oklahoma over the censorship of books in classroom libraries.

In 2022, the number of attempts to censor library books reached an unparalleled record high since the American Library Association (ALA) began documenting data about book censorship over 20 years ago, ALA said in a March press release.

ALA cataloged 1,269 attempts in 2022; nearly double the number of challenges in 2021.

"A book challenge is a demand to remove a book from a library's collection so that no one else can read it," Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom, said in a statement. "Their aim is to suppress the voices of those traditionally excluded from our nation's conversations, such as people in the LGBTQIA+ community or people of color."

Schools are among those where book bans have been especially targeted. In 2022, Texas led the country with the most book bans - 713 - affecting 16 school districts, followed by Pennsylvania and Florida with 456 and 204 bans, respectively,according to an analysis by PEN America, a literary and free expression advocacy organization.

"Each attempt to ban a book by one of these groups represents a direct attack on every person's constitutionally protected right to freely choose what books to read and what ideas to explore," Caldwell-Stone said. "The choice of what to read must be left to the reader or, in the case of children, to parents. That choice does not belong to self-appointed book police."


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JBB    last year

original

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2  CB    last year
"Although libraries are afforded great discretion for their selection and acquisition decisions, the First Amendment prohibits the removal of books from libraries based on either viewpoint or content discrimination," Pitman said.

The fight to protect access to books comes amid a book banning boom, with an alarming increase in attempts to censor books in K-12 schools, universities and public libraries. Many of these efforts seek to pull books with LGBTQ characters or themes and are part of a broader, conservative-led movement to chisel away at the rights and status of LGBTQ Americans.

Many of the book bans have also been aimed at authors of color exploring history, racism or their own experiences in America.

"Conservative-led movement" got caught stripping the people they don't like of their rights and wanted to do so with impunity. Or, just don't care about how unequal it is. That is, liberals and LGBTQ should have no rights and privileges that a conservative ought to respect. The attempt, the action, is reprehensible. It can not be forgiven, because some conservatives will try this again, and again, and yet again. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.1  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1    last year

What is your point-Whataboutism? Have is it you don't understand motivation, reasoning, and degrees all play a role in how matters are decided, judged, and opined upon? Do not just dazzle us with stats which in the larger context of discussion are irrelevant to this discussion. Democrats and Republicans ban books for different reason, motivations, and purposes!

Nuance (details) matter!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  CB @2.1.1    last year

That's actually projection, deflection, and denial CB, all some members have.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.1    last year
Democrats and Republicans ban books for different reason, motivations, and purposes!

That doesn’t matter, banning books is wrong.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.4  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.2    last year

There you go again, all three can’t occur with one little comment.  Maybe you can take Psych 101 as an Adult Education class at University of Maryland.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.4    last year

Sometimes you project.

Sometimes you deflect.

Sometimes you deny.

Sometimes you do it all at once.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.6  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.5    last year
Sometimes you do it all at once

You still don’t understand the terms you use, so it’s just a copy n paste phrase to you.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.6    last year

Of course, I understand the words I use, you project.

Or deflect?

Or deny?

It's one of those . . .

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.8  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.7    last year

This time your use of questions marks was appropriate as you really don’t know. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.9  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.3    last year

Don't be ridiculous. You can't simply WILL all book banning to be wrong anymore irrespective of content and messaging. If it was so, pornography could be coming to a library near you! You should know this, so I don't know what you attempting to pull with that comment.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.10  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.9    last year

Federal law prohibits the possession with intent to sell or distribute obscenity, to send, ship, or receive obscenity, to import obscenity, and to transport obscenity across state borders for purposes of distribution.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.11  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.10    last year

And so what is your POINT?  As pornography is legal in appropriate settings: Banned in inappropriate settings. Where am I wrong? I do hope you get to the point (soon) as these elongated deflections into side-bars is getting quite 'old' with you. I am starting to think it is intentional to deflect. Is it?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.12  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.11    last year
And so what is your POINT?  

What is your point, that libs only want to ban porn?

I do hope you get to the point (soon) as these elongated deflections into side-bars is getting quite 'old' with you. I am starting to think it is intentional to deflect. Is it?

In this context, what does deflection mean to you?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.13  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.12    last year
2.1.1 Have is it you don't understand motivation, reasoning, and degrees all play a role in how matters are decided, judged, and opined upon? Do not just dazzle us with stats which in the larger context of discussion are irrelevant to this discussion. Democrats and Republicans ban books for different reasons, motivations, and purposes! Nuance (details) matter!

My point has been made several comments ago. See above.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.14  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.13    last year
Have is it you don't understand motivation, reasoning, and degrees all play a role in how matters are decided, judged, and opined upon? Do not just dazzle us with stats which in the larger context of discussion are irrelevant to this discussion. Democrats and Republicans ban books for different reasons, motivations, and purposes! Nuance (details) matter!

What books, besides porn, do you want banned?  What is your motivation, reasoning, and what degrees play a role in your list?

Nuance (details) matter!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.15  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.14    last year

This is a deflection. This discussion is not about pornography or any books I personally want banned (if any). Stop derailing, please.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.16  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.15    last year
This is a deflection. 

No it's not: P sychological deflection is somewhat similar to blame-shifting and it is a narcissistic abuse tactic that is often used by narcissists but more respectively, Covert narcissists in order to move attention for their bad behaviors away from them, and then redirect it towards other people they may use as their scapegoats. With this tactic, a narcissist is able to control the mind and the emotions of everyone around him/her.

This discussion is not about pornography

You brought up pornography, I didn't.

or any books I personally want banned (if any). 

You spoke of liberal motivations for banning books, I then asked for some details.

Stop derailing, please.

Stop evading, please.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.17  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.16    last year

I'm not going to waste time on this. Talk about the topic, not peripherals. This is not the topic or even near it.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.18  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.17    last year
I'm not going to waste time on this.

Or anyone else's.

Talk about the topic, not peripherals.

The topic is book banning.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.19  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.18    last year

"Conservative-led movement" got caught stripping the people they don't like of their rights to read what is legal and did so with impunity. They don't care about how unequal it is. That is, liberals and LGBTQ should have no rights and privileges that a conservative ought to respect. The attempt, the action, is reprehensible. It can not be forgiven, because some conservatives will try this again, and again, and yet again.  

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.20  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.19    last year
"Conservative-led movement" got caught stripping the people they don't like of their rights to read what is legal and did so with impunity.

Maybe they self identify as conservative, but I don't define that bas conservative.  Should people have a right to read, Of Mice and Men, To Kill A Mockingbird, Huckleberry Finn, Dr. Seuss books, SkippyJon Jones books, etc?  If not, why?

  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.21  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.20    last year

Yes, why not? I read a great amount of books of/about our national history of racism (and Mandingo series). I don't know what a "SkippyJon Jones" is.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.22  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.21    last year

Thanks, you see no defense for liberal book banning.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.23  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.22    last year

There goes the liberals are in 'lockstep' theory, eh? There is too much rancor in this country, and it casts a pall on 'everything.'

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.24  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.23    last year

I thought you promised not to waste anymore of our time on you’re comments on this.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.25  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.24    last year

Yeah, too much rancor in this country and it's casting a pall on 'everything.'

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.26  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.25    last year

Did you really mean pall?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.27  CB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.26    last year

If you must ask: Yes.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.1.28  seeder  JBB  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.26    last year

A pall is a cloth placed over a coffin, tomb or hearse. Thus the term pall bearers...

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.29  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JBB @2.1.28    last year

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.30  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.27    last year

[Deleted]

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.31  CB  replied to  JBB @2.1.28    last year

pall

1 of 3

verb (1)

palled ; palling ; palls

intransitive verb

1
: to lose strength or effectiveness
2
: to lose in interest or attraction
his humor began to pall on us
He found that his retirement hobbies began to pall after a couple of years.
3
: dwindle
our enthusiasm soon palled

transitive verb

1
: to cause to become insipid
reason and reflection … pall all his enjoyments
Francis Atterbury
2
: to deprive of pleasure in something by satiating
The choicest delicacies pall the stomach in time.

cast a pall on / over

idiom

: to give (something) an unhappy mood
Their argument cast a pall on the party.
 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.32  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.31    last year

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
2.1.33  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.1.31    last year

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
3  Buzz of the Orient    last year

BRAVO!!!  I hope that judgement spreads across the nation, especially Florida.  I'm surprised the conservatives haven't tried to ban Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet yet. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1  Sparty On  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    last year

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
3.2  Hallux  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    last year

Aw come on Buzz, Juliette was almost 14 and Romeo was flirting with 16.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
3.2.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Hallux @3.2    last year

Young love.  My first serious relationship with a girl I was crazy about was when I was 16 and she was 14 - lasted for years.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
3.2.2  Ronin2  replied to  Hallux @3.2    last year

Different time period completely. 

Romeo would be arrested, charged, sentenced to a year in juvie, then transferred to a real prison, and have to register as a sex offender today.

Also, wasn't the average life expectancy something like 30 max back then?

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4  Kavika     last year

Excellent

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5  Sparty On    last year

Awesome.    

Time for all the Bibles to be brought back as well.

Excellent.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.1  Tacos!  replied to  Sparty On @5    last year

I’m sure you would have no problem finding a Bible in a public library.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  Tacos! @5.1    last year

The Bible remains one of the most challenged books in public libraries.  

Removed at some time from school districts as noted above.

The point being, this knife cuts both ways.    I’ve said it here many times.    Free speech is easy, until you disagree with it.

Banning books in all but the most extreme cases is wrong but lots of hypocrites out there will tell try to tell you different.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.1    last year
The Bible remains one of the most challenged books in public libraries.

as long as the bible stays in the fiction section, I've got no problem with it being in a library.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.3  Sparty On  replied to  devangelical @5.1.2    last year

Nah, you’ve gotten nothing to say about it.

Too bad ........

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
5.1.4  Hallux  replied to  devangelical @5.1.2    last year
as long as the bible stays in the fiction section

Sorry but that shelf is taken up by Conservapedia which I think belongs on the comedy shelf, their take on Canada is a hoot ... and anyhoot, my fingerprints are all over the history shelf so I'm biased.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.1.5  Tacos!  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.1    last year

The books are being challenged, not banned, according to your links. In Texas (big surprise), they apparently have some policy that requires books be removed while a challenge is reviewed. Sounds like somebody got wise and decided to show them how that policy can be used against books they like. Lesson learned? I doubt it.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.6  Sparty On  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.5    last year

Challenged .... banned ..... same thing.    Depends on who is in charge of deciding which it is.  

If you can’t see that, your biases are showing .....

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
5.1.7  Tacos!  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.6    last year
Challenged .... banned ..... same thing.

Oh my lord . . . 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5.1.8  Trout Giggles  replied to  devangelical @5.1.2    last year

According to the Dewey Decimal System it's a reference book so it goes where the encyclopedias and other reference materials go

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.9  Sparty On  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.7    last year

What about him?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
6  bugsy    last year

OK so any book that has the "N" word must stay on the shelves and teachers can assign those books as mandatory reading, such as "Huck Finn"

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
6.1  Tacos!  replied to  bugsy @6    last year

People really need to try and get over this urge to ban Mark Twain.

BTW, a lot of things in school are mandatory that maybe students or parents don’t like. Schools aren’t there to teach only the things that make people comfortable.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
6.2  devangelical  replied to  bugsy @6    last year

my 4th grade teacher from texas read our class the original "N" word version back in the 60's, right before she lost her job...

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
7  Nerm_L    last year

So, the only remaining recourse is the 'gun control' approach of closing the libraries.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
7.1  Tacos!  replied to  Nerm_L @7    last year

Because libraries are killing people?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
7.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  Tacos! @7.1    last year
Because libraries are killing people?

That's only an excuse.  You do know that the government spends a lot of money training people to kill?  The United States government has the best trained and most capable killers on the planet.  And the government brags about it.

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
7.1.2  Hallux  replied to  Nerm_L @7.1.1    last year
The United States government has the best trained and most capable killers on the planet.

So all that 'CRT' indoctrination hasn't gone to waste after all?

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
8  Tacos!    last year

It’s absurd that we keep having to go to court to remind regressive self-righteous government types that people have rights and that things like the First Amendment exist.

You want to ban books in your private library? Go right ahead. Public access to expression in a public library means you have to actually pay attention to the Constitution. 

If a book in the library offends you, then don’t read it. But you don’t have the right to hide it from other people who might want to read it.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
8.1  Gsquared  replied to  Tacos! @8    last year

Perfectly stated.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
9  Trout Giggles    last year

About time a judge used the First Amendment

 
 

Who is online

Tessylo
Hallux
afrayedknot


396 visitors