Advocacy organization EveryLibrary has shared some of its latest research on the status of library-related policymaking and patrons’ library usage across the U.S. In a summary titled “Codifying Censorship or Reclaiming Rights? The State-by-State 2025 Legislative Landscape for Libraries,” EveryLibrary compiles an eye-opening stack of bills that have been passed, enacted, vetoed, or left to wither on the vine. The document also details how coalitions are forming in support of intellectual freedom nationwide.

The legislative update concludes that library advocates “must actively build coalitions across our own sectors,” including outreach to “legitimate conservative or libertarian organizations.” EveryLibrary observes that coalitions “tend to skew older,” necessitating outreach to Gen Z free speech activists too. The emphasis on expanding partnerships echoes a pillar of the American Library Association’s new strategic plan.

Separately, in this year’s Freckle Project report, supported by EveryLibrary and generated annually since 2019, consumer survey data indicates that library visits and print circulation have declined more than 50% since 2011, while digital circulation has risen from 8% to 45% in the past decade. Though digital is up, the report also attests that patron demand for “more nonfiction and more backlist” print titles is going unmet.

Fighting Book Bans, Forging Alliances

The first six months of this year has brought 133 “negative bills” in 33 states, threatening public libraries, school libraries, librarianship, and the rights of readers, according to EveryLibrary’s “Codifying Censorship” white paper. Concurrently, another 76 bills in 32 states aim to protect or extend library services and intellectual freedom. In all of 2024, only 121 such “bad bills” came under consideration, and only 36 right to read bills were proposed.

Right to read legislation prohibiting censorship has been passed recently in Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, Oregon, and Rhode Island, and governors’ vetoes in New Hampshire and North Dakota have halted the effort to prosecute librarians accused of distributing “age-inappropriate” materials. Yet EveryLibrary observes that “the prevailing trend was regressive” over the past six months, and “substantial political momentum” is “reshaping the professional environment, altering governance structures, and accelerating censorship” in many states.

EveryLibrary’s research covers other precedent-setting library legislation, including Connecticut Senate Bill 1234, an e-book licensing law passed in May and designed to keep libraries from entering into restrictive agreements with publishers. SB 1234 echoes past attempts to rein in library contracts involving e-books. “The bill does not directly compel publisher behavior,” EveryLibrary notes, yet it does compare to familiar regulations around school textbook purchases. “Publishers maintain their rights as copyright holders” on instructional materials, “but regularly adapt their terms to the needs of the K–12 market,” EveryLibrary explains. SB 1234 cannot go into effect, however, until similar legislation is passed by one or more states with a total or combined population of 7 million people.

“Codifying Censorship” also warns library associations of the pros and cons of hiring “contract lobbyists to help them navigate the increasingly hostile legislative landscape.” Lobbyists are not trained in librarianship, and they may “fall into transactional politics at the state capitol” or “suggest compromise positions” unacceptable within the profession, according to the report.

In an editorial passage, “Codifying Censorship” calls for “library sector solidarity” that unites public, school, and academic categories, noting that a threat at the local level can advance to state and national prominence, and attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion in K–12 settings undermine teacher education and academic culture. EveryLibrary tells readers that our 2025 “reality calls for a change in mindset and, in some cases, a change in organizational culture.”

Surveying Library Users

In the 2025 Freckle Project report on how patrons tend to use libraries, principal investigator Tim Coates interpreted the results of an online survey conducted April 2–9 with support from EveryLibrary. His other data sets included Pew Research Center findings and the 2022 Public Libraries Survey from the federal Institute of Museum and Library Services.

The 2025 survey gleaned responses from 874 people, ages 17 and up, and excluded those who worked in or had a family member in libraries or the publishing industry. Demographic information on other identity categories was not collected. “We don’t aim at any particular segment,” Coates told PW, though he added that IMLS data suggest that “more or less half of library circulations are to children” and that “the fall in [library] use by children hasn't been so dramatic as the fall in use by adults,” based on what he found.

The report observed “no diminution in people’s need for reading” in the U.S., with 80–85% of respondents borrowing print and digital material. The data indicated that “the overwhelming use of libraries is for reading” and “contrary to general belief, there is a relatively small number of users of programs and services,” a topic worthy of closer investigation in case program participation or community service is underreported.

Coates said libraries have been reducing print collections, and he wrote in the report that the “use of public library buildings has been falling for more than a decade.” Rather than focus on frontlist digital fiction, his survey suggested, individual branch libraries should supply “more backlist nonfiction” to meet their specific community needs: “What matters is the complete collection in each and every branch,” with “each branch having detailed core stock.”

Removing barriers to borrowing, such as lengthy hold times, and prioritizing “front line” staffing over administrative tasks like cataloguing will improve library services, Coates said. He did not perceive inadequate funding as a concern, and he suggested that the IMLS Public Libraries Survey presently conducted by IMLS might be taken on by a university research team if the federal agency is shuttered—a point that iSchools might well dispute, considering their frequent reliance on IMLS competitive grants.

As librarians, “our job, essentially, is to help people find what they want to read,” Coates said. “That’s what we’re here for.”