Lawmakers weigh library censorship. Again.
Throughout my life I have seen the power of books and libraries. As a day care provider, I offered kids storytimes in my home and volunteered as a library storytime reader. While growing up in Zap, North Dakota, my five siblings and I were so hungry for the printed word that we even exchanged cereal boxes at the breakfast table. Later, I brought my own children to the Minot Public Library, checking out books for them and for myself. The library became such a large influence on our lives that my daughter grew up to be a library director.
This is why I joined Right to Read ND. We are a nonpartisan group of North Dakota citizens who believe that parents, not the government, should supervise reading choices for their own children. We trust our teachers and librarians to curate collections and provide access to information. We reject censorship and fight to protect our First Amendment right to access materials.
Once again, North Dakota legislators are trying to censor materials in our libraries. Senate Bill 2307 would require librarians to remove ill-defined 'explicit' materials from our library shelves. The bill's censorship might even extend to digital materials like ebooks, articles, and audiobooks that many North Dakotans access through their local library. These are three of the many issues we at Right to Read ND see with Senate Bill 2307: First, no one can explain how the bill would be implemented.
The bill's sponsor, Sen. Keith Boehm, R-Mandan, was recently quoted in an article in the ND News Cooperative, saying he thinks the bill's requirements would be satisfied if each library purchased a cabinet to house 200 books. So, which books would be locked in the cabinet?
The legislator's comment sounds like he already has a personal list of books that he feels are inappropriate. However, using one individual's viewpoint to guide what a library removes from their collections violates North Dakotans' First Amendment rights. If libraries pull those books from public circulation, it exposes North Dakota libraries to potential lawsuits from those who can rightfully claim they are being denied access to materials, which is their First Amendment right affirmed through cases such as the U.S. Supreme Court's 1982 ruling in Board of Education v. Pico. The First Amendment protects our right to speak and also our right to receive information. It prevents the government from blocking access, which includes locking books away in a cabinet. Second, it would be costly to taxpayers.
Compliance with this bill would require major library renovation especially impacting smaller, rural libraries who would have to remodel to create a barrier between the adult and children's sections. This would be a waste of taxpayer dollars to fund these renovations, funds that could be better used to provide library programs to our communities. Finally, we've already done this.
During the 2023 legislative session, House Bill 1205 passed both chambers and put the Federal Miller Test for obscenity into state law. The Miller Test ensures that libraries have age-appropriate materials in children's collections. This law also requires libraries to file a report yearly so the state can make sure they are complying.
Legislators are back for more in 2025 with Senate Bill 2307, which elevates the voice of a few over the needs of the many in our local communities. It's time for the Legislature to move on.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
LA City Council bans N-word at public meetings, triggering legal threats
Watch your mouth! The Los Angeles City Council voted Wednesday to ban the use of the N-word and C-word at public meetings — triggering free speech backlash and the threat of a $400 million lawsuit. The controversial vote by the body allows council leadership to issue a warning for any use or variation of the slurs. Repeat offenders can be booted from the chamber and barred from future sessions. Advertisement Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, who is black and introduced the measure, said the use of slurs during public comments has made residents hesitant to attend meetings. 3 The council chamber where a 14–0 vote Wednesday banned use of the N-word and C-word during meetings, citing years of disruptive outbursts. Los Angeles Times via Getty Images 'It is language that, anywhere outside this building where there aren't four armed guards, would get you hurt if you said these things in public,' Harris-Dawson told the Los Angeles Times earlier this year. Advertisement He added that public comment has become 'rank, cantankerous, and rude and demeaning and insulting' since Donald Trump's election in 2016, according to the LAist. The Wednesday ban is already drawing legal threats. Wayne Spindler, an attorney and longtime City Hall commenter, said Wednesday he intends to sue. 3 Critics of the new rule, including frequent City Hall speakers, claimed the city was infringing on free speech and promised legal challenges. Getty Images Advertisement 'I'm going to file my $400-million lawsuit that I already have prepared and ready to file,' Spindler said during public comment, adding he plans to read explicit Tupac Shakur lyrics until he's banned from a meeting. Spindler was arrested in 2016 after submitting a public comment card showing a burning cross, a man hanging from a tree and the phrase 'Herb = [N-word],' referring to then-Council President Herb Wesson. Prosecutors declined to bring charges. David Loy, legal director of the First Amendment Coalition, warned the council's policy likely won't survive in court. 3 Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said offensive speech has surged since 2016, creating a chilling effect on civic engagement. Los Angeles Times via Getty Images Advertisement 'The First Amendment prohibits the government from censoring speech because it disapproves of that speech,' Loy wrote in a letter to the City Council. The city has lost similar battles before. In 2014, it paid $215,000 to a black man who was removed from a meeting for wearing a Ku Klux Klan hood and a T-shirt with the N-word. The new rule took effect immediately.


New York Post
4 hours ago
- New York Post
Tortured Ukrainian journalist honored by Kyiv after her death in Russian captivity
An award-winning Ukrainian war journalist who was tortured and killed while in Russian captivity is being honored after her death. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky posthumously awarded Victoria Roshchyna the Order of Freedom on Saturday, for her 'unwavering belief that freedom will overcome everything.' 'Viktoriia was one of those who spoke the truth about the war. She worked on the frontlines and in temporarily occupied territories, risking her life,' Zelensky wrote on X. Advertisement Zelensky said Roshchyna was one of the people who spoke the truth about the war. AFP via Getty Images Roshchyna had been included in a scheduled prisoner exchange list when news of her death came in October 2024, the Ukrainian leader said. 'Russia had pledged to release her but broke its word,' said Zelensky. Advertisement The 27-year-old's mutilated body was returned in February, with her eyes, brain and part of her throat missing. She was stabbed and electrocuted before her death in a Russian prison, in what her cellmate described as 'brutal, unhinged' attacks, an investigation found. Zelensky leaves flowers at a grave site. UKRAINIAN PRESIDENTIAL PRESS SERVICE/AFP via Getty Images Roshchyna was arrested near the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant, soon after reaching the Moscow-occupied Ukrainian territories in the summer of 2023.


New York Post
5 hours ago
- New York Post
Queen's ‘Garden of Hate' taking case to federal court, rips judge and ‘scurrilous' NY Post coverage
The fight over a community garden in Queens is getting thornier. The attorney for the anti-Israel leaders of Sunset Community Garden in Ridgewood withdrew their state lawsuit against the city and the Parks Department — to make a federal case out of the issue. Since last fall, Jewish Ridgewood residents haven't felt welcome at Sunset Community Garden, thanks to the garden group's pro-Palestinian rhetoric, which included a special section labeled 'Poppies for Palestine.' 4 Some local residents said they do not feel welcome in the community garden, whose leaders asked incoming members to pledge 'solidarity' with the people of Palestine. Instagram @sunsetgardenridgewood Incoming members are also made to pledge 'solidarity with the oppressed and marginalized people' of Palestine' by the garden's management. The Parks Department wanted the group out by June 6 for 'violat[ing] the terms of their license' with the 'unconstitutional wording' of their 'ideological litmus test' for membership, according to court documents. The group responded with a state lawsuit in early June to block the eviction, and The Post was in the courtroom when attorneys for both sides met in court this month. But Jonathan Wallace, the garden leaders' attorney, withdrew the state lawsuit Monday, and told the city he plans to refile the case in federal court, a source said. In a letter this week, the lawyer accused Judge Hasa Kingo of allowing the 'scurrilous' New York Post's coverage to guide his rulings in court. 'The plaintiffs in this case are a community group composed largely of trans people of color, many of whom are immigrants, and who share a powerfully-rooted moral opposition to the horrifying violence committed by a political entity, the nation-state Israel, against the people of Gaza,' the letter read. 4 Attorney Jonathan Wallace objected to coverage from The Post. Michael Nagle 4 The garden's leaders are fighting the city's efforts to oust them. Helayne Seidman 'We could not be further from the ideals and goals stated by Justices Holmes and Brandeis when the Post appears to be influencing outcomes in judicial proceedings,' he added. 'As an old white, proudly Jewish attorney (something that in a 43-year career I never thought until now I would need to mention) I like and am content to be associated with' the garden leaders, Wallace concluded in his letter to Kingo. Christina Wilkinson — a Ridgewood resident who worked to secure funding for the green space, but is now one of its most vocal critics — said the switch to federal court a 'stall tactic,' and believes 'Parks must now remove the violators and find a community partner that will make Sunset Garden an open and inclusive place for all.' 4 Members planting in the garden in June 2024. Instagram @sunsetgardenridgewood She added, 'You have to love the irony of an attorney arguing that the City violated his clients' First Amendment rights, then turning around and complaining about [a Post reporter] being present in the courtroom.' Wallace did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The Parks Department refused to respond to requests for comment.