Public libraries, once considered the backbone of America’s civic infrastructure, are now under attack in many places across the country. Every day, librarians are harassed, threatened and intimidated for doing their jobs by people who want to turn libraries into bloody battlefields in the culture wars that are dividing this country and undermining democracy.
States like Florida and Texas have passed laws to regulate, restrict or censor the material that libraries can offer their patrons. Efforts to ban books have even occurred in Massachusetts, among the bluest of blue states.
According to an article in Time, in 2022 “(T)here were 1,269 attempts to censor library books, the highest number of attempted book bans in the two decades. During this same period, 2,571 unique book titles were targeted for censorship, an astonishing 32% increase over 2021, with 40% of book challenges occurring in public libraries, while the remaining nearly 60% occurred in school libraries.”
But we are beginning to see some long overdue push back, as states like California, Connecticut and New Jersey are now considering legislation to protect libraries and librarians. Other states need to follow their lead.
Threats to libraries are real and growing, and action is urgently needed. The fate of democracy and the fate of public libraries are inexorably linked.
As Professor Paul T. Jaeger and his colleagues note, “From the beginning of the American republic, some leaders saw the library as a social institution that could simultaneously diffuse knowledge to members of society and prevent the wealthy and socially elite from having hegemonic domination over learning and education.”
Benjamin Franklin established first library in this country, the Library Company of Philadelphia, in November 1731. It was, however, a subscription library and supported by its members.
In 1813, Congress passed legislation “to ensure the dissemination of printed legislative and executive materials to selected state and university libraries and historical society libraries.”
The Peterborough (N.H.) Town Libraries was, the American Library Association reports, “The first institution funded by a municipality with the explicit purpose of establishing a free library open to all classes of the community.” It was opened in 1833.
The ALA says that “The first public library in the U.S. is contested.” But it calls the Boston Public Library, founded in 1848, “the first free municipal library in a large community.”
A decade later, in 1859, Abraham Lincoln called libraries a cornerstone of democracy and a key to social progress. As he put it, “A capacity, and taste, for reading, gives access to whatever has already been discovered by others. It is the key, or one of the keys, to the already solved problems. And not only so. It gives a relish, and facility, for successfully pursuing the [yet] unsolved ones.”
And what Lincoln said then remains true today. Libraries are places of hope where the world opens up for ourselves and our children. They knit communities together by serving everyone and providing essential services for all.
They are community crossroads where the old and the young, the rich and the economically disadvantaged, and newcomers to this country and long-time residents mix as equals. Libraries are places where people who love books find refuge in a world where books are sometimes thought of as things of the past.
Libraries honor our history and point us toward our future.
As the Time article explains, “(L)ibraries are among the most visited public service institutions, totaling more than 1 billion visits annually with users turning to libraries for critical educational services in addition to books. Libraries are often the one place in any community… where individuals can visit at no cost and without regard to class, education, citizenship, or other demographic characteristics, without justification or need for permission.”
Libraries are rightly called “palaces of the people.” But today preserving those palaces requires action.
In California, “The Freedom to Read Act” declares that “the public library is, among other things, a source of information and inspiration to persons of all ages, cultural backgrounds, and economic statuses.”
It would “prohibit the governing board or body of a public library from proscribing the circulation or procurement of books or other resources in a public library because of the topic addressed by the materials or because of the views, ideas, or opinions contained in those materials.”
It would make it illegal for a public library “to determine the content of library materials in a manner that discriminates against or excludes materials based on specified protected characteristics, on the basis that the materials contain inclusive and diverse perspectives, or on the basis that the materials may include sexual content, as provided.”
And it would protect the right of everyone “to use a public library and its resources” by authorizing “a user of a public library to commence a civil action to obtain appropriate injunctive and declaratory relief for violations of… (that right).”
Legislation now being considered in Connecticut would require “that local boards of education provide a reason for removing or restricting access to a school library book.” Like California, it would prohibit removal of books because of “partisan politics.”
If passed, as The Connecticut Inside Investigator notes, books could not be banned because of “the authors’ or book characters’ race, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, political or religious views; personal discomfort with the book by board members; the author’s personal point of view on politics or current events; and the book cannot be removed if it is ‘related to sexual health and addresses physical, mental, emotional or social dimensions of human sexuality.’”
New Jersey’s “Freedom to Read Act,” introduced in its state Senate in January, links the health of libraries to the health of democratic governance in this country. “School libraries and public libraries, as centers for voluntary inquiry,” it says, “play a unique role in promoting intellectual freedom, providing equitable access to learning resources, and promoting democracy by providing service to all regardless of race, ethnicity, creed, age, ability, gender, or socio-economic status.”
The New Jersey legislation calls the freedom to read “a human right, constitutionally protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution,” and says that “individuals have the right to free inquiry and the right to form their own opinions.”
The freedom to read, it continues, “does not require a person to agree with topics or themes within a material, but instead allows a reader to explore and engage with differing perspectives to form and inform their own views.”
If passed, the New Jersey law would require boards of education and governing boards of public libraries “to adopt policies creating a procedure regarding requests for removal of library material from a school library or public library … and require a written statement of reasons on the final determination of the library material.”
The legislation immunizes librarians who engage in activities required under the bill “from criminal and civil liability.” It gives them a right to sue anyone who “harasses the school library media specialist, teaching staff member, librarian, or any other staff member of a public library for complying with the provisions of the bill.”
The California, Connecticut and New Jersey proposals exemplify the kinds of actions that can be taken to stand up for libraries and all they represent, and have represented, in America. In and of themselves, they will not ensure that libraries survive as free institutions and bulwarks of democracy. But they are a valuable starting point.
There is much work to be done to protect and improve our democracy. But, if we are to succeed in that work, we must rally to the defense of public libraries.
Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor Jurisprudence & Political Science at Amherst College.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Donald Low
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
visit website
