Keeping Up and Checking In

At the Freedom to Read Project, we believe in transparency and accountability in decision-making processes, especially when it comes to book bans and censorship in schools and libraries. One of the most powerful tools we have to uncover the truth is public records requests.

In recent years, the fight against book bans has intensified, with a record number of state laws passed that dictate what materials can be made available to students in libraries. These laws, often written vaguely to avoid accusations of viewpoint discrimination, leave significant discretion to local authorities. Unfortunately, many of these laws also carry severe penalties, which leads to over-compliance and self-censorship. At Freedom to Read Project, a parent-led nonprofit dedicated to fighting book bans and ensuring access to diverse literature, we believe strong policy guardrails are essential to prevent unjustified removals and protect intellectual freedom.

Why We Must Act Now to Protect the Freedom to Read

In the fight for intellectual freedom, there are two critical concepts we must understand and guard against: anticipatory obedience—or the tendency to comply with perceived authority before being required to—and the limitation effect, which describes how restrictions on access to information lead to collective harm. As a parent-led nonprofit dedicated to fighting book bans, we see these forces at work in the ongoing efforts to censor literature in schools and public libraries.

As parents, educators, and concerned citizens, our group has come together with one clear mission: to oppose the censorship of literature, particularly works that challenge and confound us. Drawing upon the insights from Gay Ivey and Peter Johnston’s article, Engaging Disturbing Books, we recognize that books confronting unsettling themes are not only vital for education but are also essential in helping our children develop the resilience, empathy, and critical thinking skills they need in a complex world.

The White House recently released an executive order titled “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling,” effectively forcing a one-sided ideology into education. As parents, we have a duty to ensure our children are getting an education that teaches them to evaluate contrasting viewpoints and think critically about a variety of content. This executive order is in direct opposition to this mission.

Would implementing a national book rating system be an effective tool to assist libraries, parents, and students in selecting appropriate reading material? The same people that are calling for school library censorship, coincidentally have a rating system that they would like to see adopted by states and even nationally - and they have the ear of some state legislatures.  If they succeed, one potential outcome could be the establishment of a national rating system that categorizes books based on content, including themes such as sexual orientation, race, gender, social justice, coming of age, and other topics deemed “inappropriate” for minors. This article examines the potential risks and implications of such a system for literature and students.

In a 1956 sermon, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. stated, “peace is not merely the absence of tension, but the presence of justice.” He expanded on this idea in his 1963 “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” describing an “obnoxious negative peace” as a state where people passively accept injustice. He argued that true peace involves the active pursuit of justice, where all people respect each other’s dignity.

King explained that nonviolent direct action doesn’t create tension but exposes it, revealing the hidden social fractures that need addressing. The real creators of tension, he argued, are those who enforce unjust laws and systems, yet they wrongly blame those who resist as disturbers of peace. He also noted that many who call him an extremist for his activism fail to recognize the radical love and justice of figures like Jesus, Abraham Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferson.