Book Censorship News, October 24, 2025

In this roundup, you’ll notice a number of editor’s notes. Many of these pieces are worth an update or have some interesting new context to add.

“Back in 2021 and 2022, I wrote a lot about how book bans weren’t about the books specifically. They’re about the ways those books can be used as a tool to do a lot more damage and they’re one arm of a many-tentacled approach in the march toward authoritarianism. Book removals allow erasure of entire swaths of people—marginalized people specifically—and book challenges and subsequent book bans are a convenient tool for destabilizing and defunding public institutions like schools and libraries.

The argument is straightforward: if you would not have purchased the “inappropriate” material in the first place, then you would not need to spend all of this money on the process of reviewing the material. Taxpayer money is at stake and poorly stewarded from start to finish. It’s a circular argument.

Books being challenged are not, of course, inappropriate. The complaints are driven by a white supremacist ideology, and that same ideology is purposefully driving narratives and policies that are defunding these institutions. “

“Books don’t simply end up on library shelves. They go through upwards of a dozen or more checks before they ever make their way into the public or school library collection. Guardrails are part of the process from start to finish.

Among book banners is a common claim that anyone can publish anything and get it in the library. This is patently false and undermines not only the professional skills of library workers, but everyone from the author to their agent to their editor to the review journal editors and reviewers themselves. Just like no doctor tries every medicine they prescribe for their patients, it is untenable for any library worker to read every book put on shelves–and the distinction here is kind of key, given that prescribing medication is just that, prescriptive. Library shelves are open and accessible but not required reading. Like a doctor, though, library workers who select material for purchase rely on the work of other professionals to do their job to the best of their abilities. Those are called colleagues, professional review journals, and community input.”

“Digital cards have been registered in every US state—minus New York, where access to such cards is not a new initiative—as well as the US territories of Puerto Rico and Guam. The top 10 states from which teens shared their stories, in descending order, are: Texas, Florida, California, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Virginia, Michigan, and Illinois. While it is true that many of these states are among the top when it comes to book banning, others are not. California and Illinois, for example, are not among the biggest banners; indeed, what that suggests is teen access to library collections may be hindered in other ways.”

“It should come as little surprise that academic libraries are also under siege nationwide. The work of dismantling them has been seen already, particularly in legislation that outlaws diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts, but in the last couple of months, these institutional cornerstones of higher education have seen it coming faster and harder. Much like with public schools, it is important to note here that the focus is on public colleges and universities. Those which are private are not subject to the same rules and oversight as their public peers—and that’s precisely why public higher education is so vulnerable. It can be regulated to the whims of political power.”

Editor’s note: boy, does this story deserve an update, given that higher education is directly in the line of attack under this regime.

“Because book bans are so overwhelming right now, it’s easy to keep reaching for these notoriously maligned titles as recommended reads. They’re also pointed to as proof of “success” in a really odd way: those books have done financially okay with being targets, as their rise in bans has brought them onto more adult radars, and more adults have used their adult money and access to buy those books from retailers. “Adult” here is key. The real victims of book bans are not the grown-ups who can buy the books but the young people who cannot.

I brought this up during a recent banned books week talk. So, too, did authors like Malinda Lo. In an era where thousands of books are being banned and thousands more challenged, how come we’re still only hearing the titles of a few and conflating those stories with the stories of every other author being censored right now? They’re representative of some things but certainly not of all things.”

Editor’s note: 98% of the books banned per PEN America’s latest report don’t make the top 9 banned books. That’s a massive number of books that will mostly go unnoticed.

“Although book censorship impacts every single one of us — it impacts our democracy on a nationwide level — it is the students who are most impacted by decisions made by school boards, library boards, library and school workers, politicians, local officials, and right-wing bad actors. They are the ones who lose the ability to access materials that educate, enrich, and entertain and more, given that the vast majority of books being banned right now are those by or about people of color and queer people, students know, see, and feel the impact of these decisions on them beyond the covers of those books. Marginalized teens see themselves being labeled inappropriate, disgusting, and more, all of which takes a tremendous toll on their mental health.

This week, let’s look at some of the student-run, student-organized groups fighting back against these book bans. These student groups against book bans are happening in response to situations in their own schools and communities, as well as in places that have yet to see such censorship. The list below was developed through submission, meaning that students, educators, parents, and/or library workers shared the information. It does not include the PARU group from Central York School District (PA), which you can read about here.”

Editor’s note: many of these groups are still wildly active. This list is ripe for revision in the coming months.

“But for all that book banners claim it is okay for the books they do not like to be sold, the reality is they are not okay with that either. In the last several years, there have been attempts to censor the materials made available at school book fairs. Among the stories include the “reevaluation” of books for sale at book fairs in Mat-Su School District (Alaska — a school with a lengthy history of book bans), the removal of Heartstopper from a Scholastic Book Fair in South Carolina, parents believing they should determine which books are available for Scholastic Book Fairs in Little Miami (Ohio), two board members of the Hastings School District (MN) removed books they disagreed with from a Scholastic Book Fair, and Grapeville-Colleyville Independent School District disallowed a Scholastic Book Fair (which was then privately held by parents angered by this overstep of local government), among dozens of others. Right-wingers have developed some pretty outlandish conspiracy theories about book fairs, too. In one instance, a candidate for the Denton Independent School District school board claimed that Scholastic Book Fairs were enticing educators to indoctrinate students.”

“At the beginning of September in honor of International Literacy Day, USA Today pulled together several interesting charts and statistics about adult literacy across the USA. One of the big takeaways is that most adults–130 million–read at or below a sixth grade level.

Something this roundup of statistics did not include, though, was the broad range of literacies available to us and where or how they appear in US adults. We are in a media-rich environment, where mis-, dis-, and mal- information are rampant, and because of the changing landscape for news, we’re frequently beholden to sources that cannot be verified several times over or to sources that simply want to spread agenda-laden lies for clicks.

Book banners have seized this opportunity.”

Editor’s note: I use this example when I speak about information literacy and manipulation, both with adults and young people. They’re always shocked to see how differently they interpret the take from Moms for Liberty vs. the original, unaltered comic.

“Libraries of all stripes — public, school, and academic — should have strong policies around how they build their collections, the types of materials they include, where and how items are removed (generally following the MUSTIE guidelines), and where and how people can challenge those materials/ask for reconsideration of their inclusion (hereafter referred to collectively as “collection policies”). Not all libraries put this information directly on their websites, though that is good practice, but it should be available to patrons if they ask to see it. Libraries who do not make these available on their websites might want to consider the implications of that choice. Many of those demanding book bans do so under the guise of libraries trying to hide an agenda, but by making those policies and forms readily accessible, book banners can’t as easily fall onto that belief. Be as transparent as possible.”

“If “book sanctuary” is a new phrase to you, it’s likely because it is a new phrase more broadly. Book sanctuaries are institutions committed to upholding the First Amendment Rights of all citizens, wherein book bans and challenges must follow through a specific procedure to be considered. They are places where books and the right to read them remains at the forefront of what an institution does, and well-funded, well-connected political groups do not get to wield their power in changing what is available.”

Editor’s note: this is worthy of an update with a full list of book sanctuaries nationwide.

Book Censorship News: October 24, 2025

• The judge overseeing the case that the ACLU brought against the removal of books from Department of Defense Education Activity schools has told the Department to return all of the books to shelves (see earlier). The implications for this are pretty big, though it is worth noting this applies only to five schools in the US. The judge believes going broader with the ruling at this point would exceed their power as a federal court.
• In another major legal win this week, a Trump-appointed judge ruled that provisions of Texas’s READER Act are unconstitutional and unworkable. The part of the law in question is about vendors needing to rate each book for its “sexual explicitness.” The law requires schools only purchase books from vendors who rate the books based on state guidelines, as schools cannot purchase any books deemed to be “sexually explicit.” (Texas passed two new laws this year that still do significant harm to school libraries, but this win is a huge deal).
• Sumner County Library Board (TN) just appointed losing swimmer turned anti-trans activist Riley Gaines to the library board. This is the library that has failed to pass a blanket ban on trans books for those under 18; now, well, they just might.
• Another judge has chipped away at First Amendment Rights. This time, it’s related to a case in Ohio, where an educator filed a lawsuit when she was told she needed to remove LGBTQ+ books from her classroom. The ruling here is really stomach-turning as the judge calls LGBTQ+ people a “controversial” issue.
• The Alabama Public Library Service held a public hearing this week about whether or not “trans” books should be banned for all young people under 18 in libraries statewide. It’s straight up, state-sanctioned discrimination. One of the most important little notes from this hearing is that the chair of the APLS is also the leader of the state’s Republican Party (see here) and so naturally, he convinced nearly 6,800 people to write in support of this bigoted, discriminatory policy. Expect this policy to pass at their November vote, since none of this is about parental rights but political power.
• Mark Diener is trying to get books removed from Manheim Township schools (PA). Last week, he begged for banning of The Art of Racing in the Rain and the week before, Last Night at the Telegraph Club.
• A right-wing legal firm is offering their services to Cromaine Library (MI). Why? Well, this is a board censoring LGBTQ+ books, including removing and labeling them. This is a mess and about to get worse.
• Speaking of Cromaine Library (MI), the board is agreeing to read all 222 challenged books.
• Mississinewa High School (IN) canceled their fall play, a stage adaptation of Jodi Picoult’s Between the Lines. Why? “Concerns about content.” They could have done a review before the production began, but that would require caring before the bigots began to get out pitchforks. The reality is they don’t–it’s only when the complainers get complaining that things are suddenly a concern.
• As books were being banned in Iowa, these Iowa high school students started a banned books club.
• Dover Area School District (PA) is currently spending their time deciding whether or not a textbook to be used for AP US History is “Anti-American.”
• A Republican in Michigan has sponsored a bill in the state that would make running for school board a partisan situation. School boards should be nonpartisan as they are there to serve the whole community. It’s not shocking it’s a republican pushing this one.
• An Ohio pastor who spent plenty of time railing against the Heartstopper books at Little Miami Schools (OH) was just arrested for child rape and battery.
• Newberg Public Library (OR) saw folks stealing their booklists this year, and of course, you know what the themes of those booklists are.
• Book banners in Victoria, Texas, are celebrating the removal of a bunch of LGBTQ+ books and books by people of color from the Victoria Public Library.
• Abilene Independent School District (TX) just had their parental book review group collect 27 titles to review. This was after local Moms for Liberty members performed titles they deemed inappropriate. That second story was written in such a way that AISD’s superintendent was not happy about and responded to, which is also worth reading (even though his take on Me and Earl and the Dying Girl is not great!).
• Pennsylvania Senator Amanda Cappelletti wants to try to pass an anti-book ban law in the state in the upcoming session. This would apply to public libraries.
• “Author Hannah Moushabeck was initially barred from reading her award-winning children’s book at a campus event due to the UNC System’s Equality Policy mandating institutional neutrality. However, Moushabeck later read it to an audience despite the policy’s prohibitions, prompting discussions on how these policies will be interpreted on campus.” Barring authors from sharing their personal stories on campuses because it doesn’t present two sides is the exact “free speech” the right wants.