AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal on a Texas free speech case that allowed local officials to remove books deemed objectionable from public libraries. This case surfaced from a 2022 lawsuit by residents in Llano County, protesting the removal of over a dozen books that included themes on sex, race, gender, and even humorous takes on topics like flatulence. A federal appeals court previously ruled that the removal did not infringe on Constitutional free speech protections, a judgment that has been criticized by free speech advocates nationwide.
Elly Brinkley, staff attorney for U.S. Free Expression Programs at PEN America, emphasized that maintaining the Fifth Circuit's ruling erodes fundamental free speech principles, arguing that it allows local governments to dictate what literature is acceptable. ‘The government has no place telling people what they can and cannot read,’ she stated.
Sam Helmick, President of the American Library Association, expressed concern that the Supreme Court's decision could transform libraries into instruments of indoctrination, undermining the First Amendment right to access diverse viewpoints. The situation escalated when a separate group of residents sued to retain the controversial titles, including highly regarded works like 'Caste: The Origins of Our Discontent' and 'Being Jazz: My Life as a (Transgender) Teen.' While a federal judge previously ordered some titles to be restored, this decision was reversed by the appeals court.
The removal of these books has already influenced similar actions across the country, raising alarms about censorship trends and the ideological control over public discourse.
Elly Brinkley, staff attorney for U.S. Free Expression Programs at PEN America, emphasized that maintaining the Fifth Circuit's ruling erodes fundamental free speech principles, arguing that it allows local governments to dictate what literature is acceptable. ‘The government has no place telling people what they can and cannot read,’ she stated.
Sam Helmick, President of the American Library Association, expressed concern that the Supreme Court's decision could transform libraries into instruments of indoctrination, undermining the First Amendment right to access diverse viewpoints. The situation escalated when a separate group of residents sued to retain the controversial titles, including highly regarded works like 'Caste: The Origins of Our Discontent' and 'Being Jazz: My Life as a (Transgender) Teen.' While a federal judge previously ordered some titles to be restored, this decision was reversed by the appeals court.
The removal of these books has already influenced similar actions across the country, raising alarms about censorship trends and the ideological control over public discourse.
