Inside the rotunda of the Idaho state capitol building. Image – Getty: Jason Finn
By Porter Anderson, Editor-in-Chief | @Porter_Anderson
‘Book Bans Are Real and Their Damage Is Profound’
The United States’ “Big Five” publishers—Penguin Random House, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Macmillan Publishers, and Simon & Schuster—have this morning (February 4) announced that they are joined by Sourcebooks, the Authors Guild, several authors, a library district, a teacher, students and parents in filing a lawsuit challenging the book-removal provisions of the state of Idaho’s House Bill (HB) 710.“Make no mistake, book bans are real and their damage is profound. We are honored to support the brave Idahoans challenging this dangerous law.”Dan Novack, Penguin Random House
The plaintiffs say that this law “restricts books in both public and school libraries in Idaho,” having been enacted into law on July 1, 2024. HB 710, according to the plaintiffs’ media messaging today “forbids anyone under age 18 from accessing library books that contain ‘sexual content,’ regardless of the work’s literary or educational merit.
“HB710’s definition of sexual content,” the plaintiffs say, “is exceptionally broad, vague, and overtly discriminatory.”
Joining the Big Five, the Authors Guild, and Sourcebooks in this suit are authors Malinda Lo, David Levithan, and Dashka Slater, the Donnelly Public Library District, a teacher, two students, and two parent plaintiffs.
The Plaintiffs’ Descriptions of Affected Literature
Donnelly Public LibraryA distinction of the Idaho law targeted by this suit, the plaintiffs say, is that its ban extends to classics such as Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye, Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, and Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.
“Our [library’s] programming—which includes the only option for after-school care in Donnelly—has been severely impacted, with children unable to step inside the building to use the bathroom or keep warm without a complex waiver.”Sherry Scheline, Donnelly Public Library
There are contemporary bestsellers being affected, as well, the plaintiffs say, including Game of Thrones by George R.R. Martin, I’ll Give You the Sun by Jandy Nelson, The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky, and Forever. . . by Judy Blume.
HB 710, the plaintiffs allege, “impacts nonfiction as well, imperiling access to factual resources such as the The ‘What’s Happening to My Body?’ Book for Girls by Lynda Madaras, and erasing history by removing books about the Holocaust and other historical events.
“The law makes no distinction between infants and 17-year-olds—books are classified as harmful regardless of the age and maturity level of the child.”
Under the law, the plaintiffs maintain, picture books such as All Are Welcome by Alexandra Penfold and Suzanne Kaufman—”a book that celebrates students from diverse backgrounds and depicts two dads walking down the street arm-in-arm as they take their young child to school—would be deemed ‘harmful for minors’ and removed from shelves.”
Comments From Nihar Malaviya
In an especially emphatic message to members of Penguin Random House staff, Penguin Random House worldwide CEO Nihar Malaviya talks of his pride in the actions put into motion today. Malaviya has told Publishing Perspectives in interview of how important libraries were to him as a boy. The keen respect and care he has for the proper protection of libraries, librarians, and the freedom to read they both represent comes through in his comments on the Idaho case:
Nihar Malaviya
“Today marks an especially significant milestone for all of us at Penguin Random House: This is the third historic lawsuit we’ve initiated against book banning in just over a year.
“I want to take this moment to state, in no uncertain terms, that Penguin Random House will unequivocally stand up for free expression and work to protect the right to read. These values go hand in hand with our ongoing goal of increasing the content we’re acquiring, publishing, and promoting by creators of all backgrounds and identities.
“Publishing books that reflect the world we live in is not only necessary for us to truly deliver on our mission to create books for everyone—it is also the best way to position ourselves to continue to grow as a business, and the very foundation of who we are and what we do.
“I want to take this moment to state, in no uncertain terms, that Penguin Random House will unequivocally stand up for free expression and work to protect the right to read.”Nihar Malaviya, Penguin Random House“We are steadfast in our support for the members of our community—colleagues, authors, and creators—who have been disproportionately impacted because of their identities and lived experiences. We will continue to cultivate a culture of inclusion and belonging in our workplace, where every employee’s safety and well-being is prioritized. …
“I want to thank our fellow plaintiffs for their bravery, as well as our Intellectual Freedom Taskforce for their tenacity and industry-leading work. Our ongoing legal efforts are only one component of the coordinated strategy the Taskforce is spearheading, including an increased focus on advocacy and education across the country.
“I am as proud as I ever have been to be part of the Penguin Random House community.
“During a time when providing access to books has never been more important, we are reaching more readers than ever before. Together, we will continue to champion the stories that need to be told and ensure they reach the readers who need them most. Whether you are behind the scenes helping our business run more smoothly, on the front lines with authors, or identifying new ways of connecting with readers around the world, you are doing life-changing, culture-shaping work. Thank you.”
The Plaintiffs’ Descriptions of Potential Prosecution
“The law not only allows county prosecuting attorneys and the state attorney general to bring claims against any school or public library,” the plaintiffs’ announcement today says, but “it also uniquely incentivizes private citizens to file legal complaints against public libraries or schools through a bounty system.
“Many libraries, including those in rural areas that are the sole book providers in their communities, cannot afford to be sued because they cannot cover the cost of a defense.
“This legal threat,” the plaintiffs tell the news media, “has resulted in a chilling effect across the state, with libraries preemptively removing hundreds of books from their shelves. Some libraries have been forced to ban minors from their premises entirely because they are too small to segregate ‘adult’ books. One such case is the Donnelly Public Library, a plaintiff in the lawsuit, which has restricted access to its building for anyone under 18 unless they are accompanied by a parent or guardian.”
Sherry Scheline
Sherry Scheline, the director of Donnelly Public Library, is quoted, saying, “Libraries should be for everyone. We foster learning, provide resources, inspire creativity, and support our patrons.
“As a result of HB 710, our programming—which includes the only option for after-school care in Donnelly—has been severely impacted, with children unable to step inside the building to use the bathroom or keep warm without a complex waiver.
“Our circulation has also declined significantly. In essence, it has become impossible to fulfill our purpose of serving the Donnelly community.”
Legal Specialists’ Points
Dan Novack
Dan Novack, vice-president and associate general counsel at Penguin Random House, is quoted, saying, “Idaho 710 goes even further than previous laws by removing classic books from public libraries in addition to schools.
“Make no mistake, book bans are real and their damage is profound.
“We are honored to support the brave Idahoans challenging this dangerous law.
“This is the third state-level challenge our publisher-led coalition has filed, demonstrating our shared commitment to protecting the First Amendment rights of authors, educators, readers, and all Americans.”
In a news conference this afternoon, Novack made several more points of distinction in what he says, is an unusually complex case.
- “This is our third challenge as a publisher coalition,” he said, “but this is the only one we’re challenging that goes into public libraries, so we’re not talking about the educational mission of schools.”
- “And it also has this really destructive element,” Novack said, “which is the ‘private right of action’— what we call a bounty system. Traditionally, if I’m a parent and I’m concerned about what my child is reading in school, I have recourse. I can talk to the librarian or the teacher or the principal and say, ‘This isn’t right for my family,’ and there will be an accommodation reached. [But] this is a scenario where we’re empowering people to play free-roaming censors. … This is about encouraging Idahoans to go out there and identify books at schools, bring cases, win damages—and it just destroys all trust that’s built up within a community.”
- Thirdly, he pointed out that many libraries may have to take drastic action in response to the law—as Scheline talked about considering turning a library into an adults-only facility—because few libraries are in a position to fund a defense, if they’re challenged on the basis of this law.
Michael J. Grygiel
According to Michael Grygiel, an adjunct faculty member with Cornell Law School’s First Amendment Clinic, “HB 710 has resulted in the removal of classic works of literature from library shelves across Idaho as libraries attempt to protect themselves from liability under the law’s vague and overbroad provisions.
“This type of self-censorship is inimical to First Amendment liberties and has suffocated the right of Idaho students to read books deemed appropriate for their age and maturity level by their parents.
“In short, the law is an affront to the Constitution. It is a privilege to represent the publishers, authors, libraries, parents, and students who have joined this lawsuit to challenge HB 710 and stand up for the First Amendment rights of all Idaho citizens.”
Plaintiffs’ Representation
The plaintiffs are represented by the Cornell Law School First Amendment Clinic, with support from affiliated attorney Michael Grygiel, Stanton Fellow Daniela del Rosario Wertheimer, and Deborah Ferguson of Ferguson Durham PLLC.
As Publishing Perspectives‘ international readers know, this lawsuit follows recent legal actions by Penguin Random House, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Macmillan Publishers, Simon & Schuster, and Sourcebooks against Iowa and Florida public officials, challenging the book-banning provisions of Senate File 496 (SF496) and House Bill 1069 (HB 1069) respectively.
Penguin Random House is also a plaintiff in a lawsuit filed with PEN America against the Escambia County (Florida) School District over books that the plaintiffs say have been unconstitutionally removed.
See also:
A US Censorship Victory: Arkansas’ Act 372 Ruled Unconstitutional
USA: A New State ‘Freedom to Read Act’ Bans Bannings of Books
US Election Eve: PEN America’s Book Banning Report Cites 10,046 Books Banned in the 2023-2024 School Year
Banned Books Week: A Renewed Court Challenge to Iowa
Censorship Action: US Publishers and Authors Sue Florida
More from Publishing Perspectives on book bannings is here, more on censorship in the broader context is here, more on the freedom to publish and freedom of expression is here, and more on the United States book industry is here.