Settlement In Florida Book Ban Lawsuit Means A Bunch Of Books Are Headed Back To School Libraries
from the unburning-books dept
Florida’s legislative antipathy towards free speech and general overall bigotry has generated plenty of bad laws and plenty of fully justified lawsuits. Earlier this month, the state’s quasi-book bans became the defendant in a federal lawsuit filed by multiple big-name publishers. But that was just the latest lawsuit, and the first to actually sue the state itself.
Plenty of other litigation is underway, targeting individual counties that have removed books from schools due to book challenges (over-)enabled by the state’s anti-speech laws. But there’s finally a little bit of good news to report. A lawsuit filed on behalf of two authors and two parents against Nassau County and its school board has resulted in a win for the plaintiffs. As Politico reports, lots of books that should have been removed under the (extremely loose) standards of the law are being placed back on the shelves of school libraries.
A northeast Florida school district this week agreed to restore 36 books that were challenged and previously pulled from campus libraries in a settlement of a federal lawsuit fighting how local officials carried out the state’s policies for shielding students from obscene content.
The settlement reached by Nassau County school officials and a group of parents, students and the authors of the removed children’s book “And Tango Makes Three” marks a significant twist in the ongoing legal battles surrounding Florida’s K-12 book restrictions, which have been derided as “book bans” by opponents. Under the agreement, that book and others such as the “The Bluest Eye” by Toni Morrison and the “The Clan of the Cave Bear” by Jean Auel will once again be available to students after being removed last year.
None of these fit the legal standards for obscenity. If they did, they would have been removed under existing obscenity laws, rather than only recently removed because some bigoted jackasses, enabled by the new law, applied the pressure needed to remove content they don’t like.
Nope, this is just codified hatred that allows people to decide no one should have access to books they don’t personally care for. The dumbest part of this is probably the removal of “And Tango Makes Three,” which contains nothing even remotely resembling “obscene” material. This is from law firm Selendy Gay’s statement on the lawsuit settlement:
Significantly, the Board acknowledges in the settlement that Tango has pedagogical value, is appropriate for students of all ages, and contains no “obscene” material—facts that another Florida School Board—in Escambia County—is still contesting. The Board’s acknowledgement makes good sense: since its publication in 2005, Tango has been a highly awarded children’s book and has been lauded by educators and childhood development experts. Tango, which tells the true story of a same sex penguin couple who form a lasting pair bond and together adopt, hatch, and raise a happy and healthy chick, conveys important themes about family responsibility, adoption, LGBTQIA+ families, and natural science to which all students should have access.
Just the same old bigotry, but with a new law to abuse. No one contesting this book truly believed the material was “obscene.” They just don’t believe any student of any age should have access to a book that contains a positive depiction of a same-sex relationship.
And it’s just blatant racism driving some of the other book removals:
These 35 [challenged] books include significant works by Toni Morrison, Jonathan Safran Foer, Alice Sebold, Jodi Picoult and Erika Sanchez, which address racism in America, as well as the life experiences of immigrants, first-generation Americans, trans Americans and other underrepresented communities and individuals.
It’s also the same old bigots. The statement from the law firm points out that all 35 of the books removed were challenged by a of collective censorial asshats calling themselves “Citizens Defending Freedom.” Of course, there’s little about the group that indicates any actual desire to defend freedoms.
Citizens Defending Freedom (CDF) is the latest organization to establish a spoke-and-wheel structure to centrally manage local politicking on a range of hot button conservative issues. Its promise to “PROVIDE materials for home school families” is what first drew my attention, but CDF also claims that chapters in 100 counties will address corruption, school curricula, and “breaches of constitutional liberty.” It’s at 20 active chapters, so it’s got a way to go.
Nevertheless, the organization — just a couple of years old at this point — already takes credit for Nueces County, TX ending its sex education classes, Miami-Dade County introducing a Day of Prayer in public schools, and Lake Wales, FL for creating “Responsible Fatherhood Month.” Its chief opponents, not surprisingly, seem to be the NAACP, George Soros, and Walt Disney.
Yes, nothing says “defending freedom” like removing books from school libraries and forcing public schools to host days of prayer. Or, you know, implicitly threatening Nassau County school officials with arrest for agreeing to return these books to school libraries, as CDF does in its statement in response to the lawsuit settlement:
In response to this settlement, CDF has also made the Nassau County Sheriff aware, highlighting the district’s own admission of the presence of obscene materials in schools and shared the district’s own findings as evidence that they are distributing materials in violation of Florida’s child obscenity laws. “By their own words, the Nassau School District has determined these books violate state law. Yet, rather than take corrective action, they’ve chosen to put them back in the hands of our children. We intend to hold them accountable,” said Sarah Calamunci, CDF Florida State Director.
Keep crying, haters. People who actually care about freedom will continue to combat efforts like these, as well as the unconstitutional laws that enable them. Here’s wishing you loss after loss after loss in the coming months, as federal judges (for the most part) continue to recognize these efforts for what they are: government-enabled censorship of views those in power don’t agree with.
Filed Under: 1st amendment, book ban, censorship, florida, free speech, justin richardson, lawsuit, peter parnell, sara moerman, toby lentz
Companies: selendy gay


Comments on “Settlement In Florida Book Ban Lawsuit Means A Bunch Of Books Are Headed Back To School Libraries”
What freedom is defended by banning books based on the religious beliefs of one person/group?
Re:
I feel like I’d know the answer to that if my library still had a copy of 1984.
Re: Re:
You’re lucky yours was only removed. The copy of Farenheit 451 I wanted to check out had been burned…
Re: Re: Re:
People keep mentioning “Fahrenheit 451” every time censorship happens. That book is NOT about censorship. Bradbury, himself, explicitly said so.
Re: Re: Re:2
While the original artist may not have intended it that way, readers can still find meaning outside the author’s intent. Happens quite a lot, actually (famous examples include Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, Anthony Burgess’ Clockwork Orange, etc). Bradbury may not have intended it, but Fahrenheit 451 does end up exploring concepts around censorship.
Authorial intent in this particular case is also a bit muddy, given that Bradbury doesn’t seem to have spoken definitively on the issue until 2007 (and there are some contradictory statements earlier in his career, see for instance here ).
Re: Re: Re:2
He actually didn’t explicitly say that. In all the interviews he has given about 451 he has never said it wasn’t about censorship. He said the book isn’t just about censorship though, it’s also about topics related to censorship like for example enforced political correctness.
Go see for yourself: https://web.archive.org/web/20190710071242/http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:168044/datastream/PDF/view
Re:
The freedom to oppress others, of course! /s
Re:
They want to raise their kids to be abused and ignorant. They’re defending the “freedom” to force the rest of us to enable them.
Re:
The freedom to defend the religious belief of one person/group that theses (banned) books suppress.
Freedom is a relative principle, some gets less freedom for others to get more.
And since nobody want to be oppressed, their use their power to keep their position, and so, keep their power.
Yesterday problem was Science, today is immigrants, gayness and trans, and tomorrow will still be the major difficulty in this world: thinking.
Re: Re:
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
Re:
The only ‘freedom’ they care about, their ‘freedom’ to do whatever they want without consequence and force everyone else to think and act according to their ideals.
Re:
The freedom to display their bigotry openly
Re:
I don’t see anyone banning the Bible, actually…
Re:
You have to use the alternative dictionary used by bigots.
In that dictionary, “freedom” means “I can do or say whatever I want without consequences, and neither myself nor my family will be exposed to things we don’t approve of”.
Unfortunately, that’s not compatible with the real world, so you end up with idiots trying to ban books that mention reality. Or, even not reality, since these people will happily fight each other over the correct version of the bible if no other book is present.
The only silver lining here is that for the kids who do want to be educated, they’re created a must read list of books to find, in an age where it’s essentially impossible to block them.
Book-banners taking Ls, you love to see it.
Let’s hope it continues to go this way.
mark the students
They should take a cue from the schools that would stamp the hands of or otherwise mark students who were receiving free school lunches. A parent objects to their child having certain books? Fine, that student has to wear a ‘restricted’ tag in the library and only has access to books their parents have pre-approved. Everyone else enjoys their normal access. If the child removes their tag, that’s between them and their parents. It would solve the problem of people without children in the school system interfering with the library. It might also make some students feel like the marked students have weird parents. (Which they do.)
Re:
Scarlet letter is no answer.
Re:
The students shouldn’t be punished, singled out, or otherwise made to feel bad for the hatred and bigotry of the parents. Tell the parents to fuck off or to homeschool their kids.
From dumpster to library; organic, fully sustainable.
Re:
Teflon has entered the chatroom.
Re:
Who is Harry?
Why are the supporters of Small Government working so hard to create Big Justice?
Each one of these laws spawns multiple lawsuits that eventually overturn part or all of the laws. Which really means, government has to expand and intrude further into people’s everyday life in order to correct the obvious issues created by “Small Government”.
...but a quick google led me to
a Sept. 13 article from the Tallahassee Democrat explains how just one school board paid $107000 to defend banning just one book (in this case it was “And Tango Makes Three”). Let’s bleed schools dry for unconstitutional bans; I guess that’s a win-win strategy for them.
Y’know, for years now these assholes have told people like me that we hated this country.
I really, really wish they wouldn’t work so fucking hard to make that true.
When you hear 'pornographic' what you should hear is 'not bigoted'
Tango, which tells the true story of a same sex penguin couple who form a lasting pair bond and together adopt, hatch, and raise a happy and healthy chick, conveys important themes about family responsibility, adoption, LGBTQIA+ families, and natural science to which all students should have access.
…
These 35 [challenged] books include significant works by Toni Morrison, Jonathan Safran Foer, Alice Sebold, Jodi Picoult and Erika Sanchez, which address racism in America, as well as the life experiences of immigrants, first-generation Americans, trans Americans and other underrepresented communities and individuals.
Just in case anyone was still gullible enough to believe the ‘book bans are all about removing pornographic material from libraries’ claims, this is what counts as ‘pornographic’ to the ones making that argument. Adoption and raising a family by a same-sex couple, and/or books about racism, racial discrimination, and the lives of minorities.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Hopefully Parents do the right thing and remove the porn books from the shelves themselves and destroy them.
Re:
Would you mind explaining what content in And Tango Makes Three is obscene? Please note that the existence of queer people is not inherently obscene, so saying “there are gay penguins in it” will not count as an answer worth taking seriously.
Re:
What’s it like to live in a headspace where words mean whatever the hell you need them to in order to perform whatever bigotries you want to?
Re:
You’re literally admitting that you think of two male penguins in a sexual manner. You’re just telling on yourself here.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
I’m proud to oppose the sexualization of children.
Re: Re: Re:
“Those two men love each other like your mommy and daddy love each other.” A parent can say that to their child to explain a gay couple and never once have to mention sex.
That besides: If anyone around here is sexualizing children, it’s the guy who professes to believe a 12-year-old incest victim should be forced to birth her own half-sibling.
Re: Re: Re:
You are sexualizing non-sexual things. Two gay parents are not inherently sexual. Two men or two women can be married and not have sex or if they do have sex, it is not the defining aspect of the relationship. As you and your wife no doubt know, hetero couples can also be in sexless marriages. Sex isn’t the defining aspect of being gay (or straight). Sex isn’t the defining aspect of being transgender or non-binary or gender queer. These are not sexual topics unless you’re specifically addressing gay sex or hetero sex or whatever fetish topics we’d find in your browser history that you don’t want your church pastor to know about.
Children shouldn’t be sexualized. They should be kept away from people like you who sexualize everything.
Re: Re: Re:
Then start opposing your political party then.
Last I hear, they want to make child sexual abuse easier with these laws being promoted…
Re: Re: Re:2
Republicans in several states have voted against laws banning child marriage, too.
Re: Re: Re:
You’re not opposing it though. By calling now you clearly know fuck all about obscene simply because it includes gays, you’re enabling what you claim to oppose.
You’d be a huge hypocrite if you were smart enough to know what that word means.
Re: Re: Re:
So, you oppose the religious leaders, scout masters and Republicans who regularly get caught with CSAM? You oppose the weird Honey Boo Boo show or whatever that thing was called, where kids are paraded around in beauty pageants?
Oh, no apparently you just oppose books that admit that gay people exist and that teenagers go through puberty. You’re free to stop your kids from reading those if you wish (though don’t be surprised if they do it anyway), but your attempts to stop others from doing so will fail.
Re:
I agree. When do you think they’re going to remove and destroy all copies of the Bible in school libraries?
Hold still! I’m trying to beat some freedom into you! This is for your own good!
The removal of the book And Tango Makes Three shows quite clearly that Conservatives view the notion of two men in a romantic relationship becoming parents together to be obscene, which of course says far more about those Conservatives than it does the book.