Judge Strikes Down Parts Of Florida Law Used To Remove School Library Books

A federal judge has overturned multiple provisions of a 2023 Florida law that allows parents and other community residents to seek the removal of what they see as objectionable material on school library book shelves.

Judge Carlos Mendoza of the Middle District of Florida handed down the decision on Aug. 13, drawing praise from the plaintiffs, including major publishers and several authors, who called the judge’s opinion a victory for free speech.

The Florida statute required each district school board in the state to set up a policy allowing residents in their county to fill out standardized objection forms about materials available in school libraries that contain passages that are “pornographic” or describe sexual conduct.

Under the provisions of the law, books targeted by such objections must be removed from shelves within five school days and remain unavailable to students until the school board resolves the complaints.

Mendoza granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment based on problems with key portions of the law. He ticked off titles of books that have been removed from Florida school libraries, such as “The Color Purple,” “The Kite Runner,” “Slaughterhouse-Five,” “The Handmaid’s Tale” and “The Bluest Eye.”

“None of these books are obscene,” Mendoza said in his opinion. “… The restrictions placed on these books are thus unreasonable in light of the purpose of school libraries. And if so, the presence of these books in school libraries certainly does not materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.”

The law’s barring of library materials that depict sexual behavior is both unconstitutional and overbroad, he said.

“The reading prescribed by the (state’s) Objection Form unmoors the word ‘pornographic’ from any context and expands its scope into unconstitutional applications,” Mendoza said. “Construed in that way, it becomes an ‘I know it when I see it’ provision.”

The Florida Department of Education has not explicitly said it would appeal the ruling, but department press secretary Nathalia Medina said the department would continue to work to shield children from unsuitable materials.

“We remain unwavering in our commitment to defending parental rights and protecting children from exposure to inappropriate content,” Medina told the Florida Record in an email. “This is a fight we are determined to win, no matter how hard the activists work to try to stop us.”

The Authors Guild, a professional association for published writers and one of the plaintiffs in the case, called the opinion a total victory for writers and publishers.

“This victory affirms what we’ve always known – that literature has the power to expand worlds, foster empathy and help young people understand themselves and their experiences,” Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild, said in a prepared statement. “Book bans don’t just censor words on a page; they silence authors’ lived experiences and deny students access to the stories that help them navigate an increasingly complex world.”

Dan Novack, the attorney for plaintiff Penguin Random House, also celebrated Mendoza’s opinion as a win for First Amendment rights.

“It’s a complete knockout,” Novack said on X, formerly Twitter. “There’s not a single issue that the court did not side with the plaintiffs on.”