Book banning legislation chills speech, encourages teachers and librarians to soft censor, and demonizes content by LGBTQ+ and BIPOC authors. With accusations of obscenity, pornography, and material that’s harmful to minors, book banners aim to intimidate educators and librarians, who know their constitutional rights yet fear the wrath of conservative parents and politicians.
If the current political climate emboldens censors to target material perceived to be about “gender ideology” and critical race theory, it also rallies anti-censorship forces, which are drafting freedom-to-read legislation and taking lawmakers to court. PW looked at a few of the many federal and state legal cases shaping American’s right to read.
PEN American Center Inc. v. Escambia County School District
What’s at stake: Starting in 2022, Escambia County School District removed books from Florida public school libraries.
Who’s involved: In May 2023, PEN America, PRH, six authors, and a family said the challenges to 197 books violated the First Amendment and 14th Amendment by disproportionately targeting work by nonwhite and LGBTQ+ authors and about topics concerning race and gender.
How it’s going: Some books have been returned to shelves. In August, a second amended complaint was filed demanding a trial by jury. U.S. district judge T. Kent Wetherell II, a Trump appointee, is deciding the case.
Crookshanks v. Elizabeth School District
What’s at stake: In summer 2024, Elizabeth (Colo.) School District’s board of education created a “sensitive” book list of more than 100 titles and “temporarily suspended” at least 19 books by and about BIPOC and LGBTQ+ people.
Who’s involved: In December 2024, the ACLU of Colorado sued the ESD on behalf of the Authors Guild, the NAACP, and two parents. The plaintiffs claim viewpoint discrimination, students’ right to receive information, and authors’ right to share books.
How it’s going: In a preliminary injunction, Biden-appointed district judge Charlotte Sweeney ordered ESD to reshelve the books. ESD has appealed.
PRH v. Gibson
What’s at stake: Florida HB 1069 allows parents to file objection forms and remove K–12 library material that depicts or describes sexual content.
Who’s involved: In August 2024, the Big Five, Sourcebooks, the Authors Guild, and two parents filed suit, questioning HB 1069’s definition of “harmful to minors” and refuting the “government speech” argument, a determining factor in the Fifth Circuit’s Little v. Llano County decision.
How it’s going: In August 2025, U.S. district judge Carlos E. Mendoza, an Obama appointee, ruled that HB 1069 violates the First Amendment. State defendants have appealed to the 11th Circuit.
PRH v. Labrador
What’s at stake: Idaho HB 710 prohibits school and public library books containing sexual content.
Who’s involved: The Big Five, Sourcebooks, the Authors Guild, the Donnelly Public Library District, and Idaho residents initiated the case in February, saying HB 710 violates the First Amendment.
How it’s going: U.S. district judge Amanda K. Brailsford, a Biden appointee, has stayed proceedings until a November 3 hearing on Northwest Association of Independent Schools v. Labrador, a similar HB 710 case currently on appeal.
E.K. v. Department of Defense Education Activity
What’s at stake: Responding to White House executive orders, DoDEA schools removed more than 500 library books, citing gender ideology, divisive concepts, and discriminatory equity ideology.
Who’s involved: Students of military families at five DoDEA schools sued in April, saying the removals violate their First Amendment rights. Defendants argue that the curricular changes are government speech.
How it’s going: U.S. district judge Patricia Tolliver Giles, a Biden appointee, ordered a list of the library books under review, which was filed on the public docket in July.
Missouri Association of School Librarians v. Jean Peters Baker
What’s at stake: Missouri SB 775 restricts and removes books with sexually explicit images and threatens educators with penalties including jail time.
Who’s involved: In February 2023, the Missouri ACLU sued the Jackson County prosecuting attorney on behalf of the Missouri Association of School Librarians and Missouri Library Association for violating the First Amendment.
How it’s going: More than two years later, Jackson County’s circuit court has not rendered a verdict.
PRH v. Robbins
What’s at stake: Iowa SF 496 compels public school teachers and librarians to remove books that contain a description of a sex act.
Who’s involved: In November 2023, PRH, the Iowa State Education Association, four authors, and three educators sued; Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, S&S, and the Authors Guild joined them in 2024. They argue that SF 496 violates the First Amendment and 14th Amendment.
How it’s going: U.S. district judge Steven H. Locher, a Biden appointee, has twice blocked key provisions of SF 496. The case is on appeal in the Eighth Circuit, where 10 of the 11 judges are Republican appointees.
BookPeople v. Wong
What’s at stake: Texas HB 900 bans sexually explicit books from public schools and would impose a rating system.
Who’s involved: BookPeople in Austin and Blue Willow Bookshop in West Houston joined the American Booksellers Association, the Association of American Publishers, the Authors Guild, and the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund in a July 2023 complaint. The plaintiffs say HB 900 violates the First Amendment and 14th Amendment.
How it’s going: Trump-appointed U.S. district judge Alan D. Albright is presiding. A motion hearing is expected in the coming months.
