Utah Continues To Ban More Books, Even As It Racks Up More Lawsuits
from the codifying-the-heckler's-veto dept
Utah’s budding theocracy continues unimpeded as we head into the new year. On top of its other unconstitutional laws (like the oft-challenged social media ban) and legislative proposals, there’s its book ban law that has seen it become the first state to actually remove certain books from all public schools across the state.
The targeted books are exactly the ones you think they are. Of the 13 titles to make the first ban list in 2024, 12 of them were written by women. It has added more titles to the ban list for 2026, as BookRiot reports.
To begin the new year at public schools across the state, Utah officials banned three more books. Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West by Gregory Maguire, Nineteen Minutes by Jodi Picoult, and The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky join 19 other titles on a state-sanctioned ban list and must now be removed from all schools.
This law is basically just a heckler’s veto. No consensus is needed to subject a title to removal across the state. The law allows parents to file book challenges which, in reality, means a few bigoted activists will be able to impose their will on every resident in the state.
The law compounds this deliberate error by allowing certain schools (or those being pressured by this small group of anti-freedom activists) to place their thumbs on the scale. Since that’s what the law is designed to do, that’s exactly what has happened:
What is important to understand about the law is that despite claims this is about “local control,” schools in the state are forced to follow the decisions made in other districts. There are 42 public school districts in Utah, but two districts account for nearly 80% of the books banned statewide: Davis School District and Washington School District.
The three latest book bans came exclusively because of bans at Davis, Tooele, and Washington school districts. Again, two districts are doing nearly all of the dictating of what books are allowed at public schools throughout all of Utah.
“Local control” is as meaningless as “representative democracy.” Someone will always find a way to game the system to ensure they keep what they have if not take a little more. Political parties gerrymander. Utah legislators craft laws that allow a small subset of state schools to write the rules for the rest of them.
For now, the law remains in place and the entirety of the state remains under the direct, definitely not “local” control of a couple of school districts. For now. But things could get a bit more interesting soon, now that a serious challenge to the law has been raised by some of the authors directly affected by these bans.
A group of best-selling authors whose books are banned from Utah public schools are suing the state, arguing its sensitive materials law is unconstitutional.
Filed in federal court, the lawsuit comes after three more books were banned from K-12 schools.
[…]
Among those suing over Utah’s book ban law are award-winning novelists Elana K. Arnold and Ellen Hopkins, the Estate of Kurt Vonnegut and two anonymous Utah public high school students.
The lawsuit [PDF] raises questions the state isn’t going to be in any hurry to answer.
The Book Removal Law, codified at Section 53G-10-103 of the Utah Code, is unmoored from the First Amendment and requires Utah’s Local Education Agencies (“LEAs”) to strip their school libraries of any book that contains even a single description or depiction of sex, no matter how fleeting, no matter its context, and no matter its literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
The Book Removal Law also never asks the most basic question: appropriate for whom? A kindergartner learning to sound out words and a twelfth-grader weeks from graduation are treated identically. As described below, once a book is labeled “sensitive,” it must be taken from the shelf, including the high school library. There is no recognition that a seventeen-year-old preparing for college, navigating identity, relationships, and the realities of adulthood stands in a fundamentally different place than a five-year-old.
This creates an absurd mismatch with other parts of Utah’s own legal standards. State law permits sixteen-year-olds to consent to certain sexual activity. Yet the same students whom Utah trusts to make intimate, real-world decisions about their bodies are, under the Book Removal Law, barred from accessing out books that contain a mere single passage describing the very conduct in which is lawful for them to engage. The Book Removal Law tells them: you are mature enough to do this, but not mature enough to read about it.
The answer is, of course, that this isn’t about protecting children from content that might be inappropriate for them. It’s about giving bigots and public employees an easy way to remove content they personally don’t like. Because its ulterior motive is its only motive, it’s been written in a way that makes it extremely susceptible to legal challenges. With any luck, this law won’t survive much longer and the people who think no one should have access to content they don’t care for will have to go back to the ineffective seething that seems to make up a disproportionate portion of their existence.
Filed Under: 1st amendment, book ban, censorship, free speech, utah


Comments on “Utah Continues To Ban More Books, Even As It Racks Up More Lawsuits”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Libraries not stocking certain books is not “banning them”. If it were, every book is banned, since no book is in all libraries. Just literally not what that word means.
The legislature telling publicly funded libraries not to carry a book is not banning that book, either. You can still buy that book on your own.
Outside of child porn, there is no such thing as a “book ban” in the US.
Re:
Yes, it is a book ban. Not everyone can afford to buy books, and not everyone can buy certain books without risking some form of negative consequences from social shunning to physical violence. (A closeted gay teenager in a heavily anti-gay town could tell you that.) A library exists to give those people a place to find and/or read those books. By removing them from circulation on orders from the government, those books are effectively being banned by the government over content the government doesn’t like. If it isn’t somehow a First Amendment violation for the government to ban books from libraries based only on the content of that book, the government shouldn’t have any problem banning the Bible from school libraries for its multiple depictions of sex regardless of the length or context of those depictions and regardless of the book’s “literary, artistic, political, or scientific value”.
Of course, I assume that the moment someone does go after the Bible for that exact reason, you’ll start calling that a book ban even though, from an entirely secular standpoint, the Bible should be permanently removed from every school library in the state of Utah under the law as it is written. To deny the Bible equal treatment under the letter of the law is to privilege religion in general (and Christianity/the Bible in particular) over ostensibly secular texts.
You can’t have it both ways here and there is no middle ground. Either the book bans should be stricken down or the law should be applied equally to the Bible (and any other religious text with a depiction of sex). Which one do you choose?
Re: Re:
How’s that teenager going to tell anyone anything from their grave?
Re:
Actually, the legislature mandating you not carry a book in your library is quite literally a ban.
If a student bought copies of every book that ‘was legislated not to be stocked’ with their own money and initiative and started handing them out to every classmate who walked into the library…
Do you think they would be stopped?
I sure do!
Re:
From Merriam-Webster:
ban
to prohibit especially by legal means
also : to prohibit the use, performance, or distribution of
If the shoe fits.
Next step :
Public book burnings 🔥 and pre approved “patriot” speeches about the glories of our father the fuhrer and the glory of his golden reich.
Re: Re:
Why stop at burning the books, why not have public author burnings as well?
'That book doesn't count because we LIKE that book!'
requires Utah’s Local Education Agencies (“LEAs”) to strip their school libraries of any book that contains even a single description or depiction of sex, no matter how fleeting, no matter its context, and no matter its literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
And yet I have no doubt whatsoever that if the bible doesn’t have an official exemption despite absolutely being ban-worthy by their own standards it’s still given an ‘unofficial exemption’ any time someone points it out because how could anyone think the bible isn’t child-friendly?
One day someone might use the ‘Think of the children!’ justification to actually try to help kids rather than just exploit them for the speaker’s own personal goals, but today is not that day.
Re:
Children (kinda like fetuses) are really easy to legislate in the name of. They can’t legally consent to much; no one wants to be accused of harming them on a mass scale; and legislation in their name often has the added bonus of controlling the adults around them. I’m not saying kids should be in charge of major decision making (eff no), but American adults especially need to figure out how to take kids seriously. Kids are capable, curious, and often more resilient than we adults give them credit for. If we don’t start acknowledging this a bit, we adults will always agree that our rights should be limited in the name of protecting the children.
Re:
I’m trying to remember if the Book of Mormon has any explicit mention of sex or rape. I know it talks about a prophet’s child running off with a prostitute (in a condemning manner).
Re: Re:
Moroni 9 is probably the darkest chapter in the book.
So
Couldn’t one of the other districts ban the Bible. Or the art of the deal. See how long the law stands after that?
Re:
https://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/1hv0ebt/texas_book_ban_law_causes_a_school_district_to/
It happened in Texas so this would be a slam dunk if the judiciary wasn’t openly disregarding stare decisis and equal protection under the law.
Hypocrisy is a power flex for the right wing, not a gotcha they are vulnerable to.
If you want to circle the wagons against the right wing as a judge or liberal police officer, start with ‘Every accusation from a right wing voter is a confession’ and act accordingly, legally, on that presumption.
They misspelled Morons when they named their cult
Republicans should just cut to the chase and ban children from reading. They don’t want people educated in anything but the bible and that can be taught verbally in Sunday school.
Re: 'That's not what it says!' (Person reads bible) 'That's not what it means!'
Given the number of self-described chistians I’ve seen get very uncomfortable if not outright confrontational when having someone actually read the bible to them I’d argue they don’t want people educated in the bible either other than very specific verses that they believe support their claims/positions.
TBH, Jodi Picoult’s books should be banned, but not under these restrictive wide-ranging book bans.
Starting with the Bible? After all, the Book Removal Law does say “no matter its context.”
Fun fact: recently, one of the main not-Amazon online bookstores in Germany started advertising some of the English-language books and translations of English-language books they have on offer as “banned in the USA”
Yes, I know, it’s a cheap and transparent attempt to cash in on the Streisand Effect, but it’s still quite telling.
Murder is Illegal
Murder is illegal. Writing about murder is legal. Having sex is legal. Writing about having sex is illegal.
Re:
“Having sex is legal”
No. Lots of factors need to be taken into account to determine that.
Is S/He old enough to consent? Did they consent…Too much to list here. #MeToo
With “shadow libraries” being in the news lately, I get the feeling that they’ll be even more popular now. After all, the authorities have made it plain and clear that certain books are forbidden for the inquisitive child or teen to read. So, if the libraries and booksellers won’t stock them, the “shadow libraries” will. Prohibition again.