A federal appeals court heard arguments Tuesday about whether to uphold a lower-court ruling blocking Iowa’s school library book ban and a provision that prohibits the teaching of gender identity and sexual orientation through sixth grade.
The case could have far-reaching implications for free speech and censorship in education beyond Iowa.
Members of the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in St. Paul appeared reticent, based on their questioning of attorneys during nearly a half hour of arguments, to affirm a district court’s order granting the preliminary injunction.
Two federal lawsuits have been filed arguing the state law violates the free speech rights of students, authors and book publishers. The challenges were filed by Lambda Legal and the ACLU of the Iowa on behalf of LGBTQ+ students, their families and the LGBTQ+ advocacy organization Iowa Safe Schools, and another from publishing company Penguin Random House on behalf of authors, a parent, teachers and school librarians.
Two of the three judges on the panel questioned whether plaintiffs should be challenging the state law as a whole as opposed to filing more specific lawsuits against specific school districts over their removal of books and interpretation of the law.
U.S. Circuit Judge Ralph Erickson, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, suggested litigants should take small bites and try to “slap it down, piece by piece” by suing individual school districts.
“Because I think what's going on here is you've got the school districts are in a dead panic,” Erickson said. “They're applying (the law) more broadly than the language of the statute itself provides.”
He said certain books that have been removed from some schools, such as “1984,” “Animal Farm” and “The Picture of Dorian Gray,” are "probably seen to have artistic merits such that application of this statute is inappropriate.”
U.S. Circuit Judge James Loken, a George H.W. Bush appointee, questioned “why does the First Amendment care” if a book is removed from a school library as long as it's still available at a local bookstore.
Attorney Fred Sperling, representing the book publishers, said school libraries are intended to provide access to books for all children, regardless of whether they can buy it at the bookstore, and that students have a right to receive information that is age-appropriate. The law, though, makes no differentiation as to what is appropriate for certain grade levels.
“There's no distinction whatsoever as to age, and so books that might be fully appropriate for a 12th-grader might not be for a ninth-grader or sixth-grader or third-grader or kindergartner; it makes no distinction whatsoever,” Sperling said.
He also disagreed with Erickson and Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan, who argued for the injunction to be overturned, claiming there are routes for “as-applied” challenges to the state law.
“The question before this court is not whether some of the books the state defendants can point to may be constitutionally removed from school libraries,” he said. “They can, and they have been under existing law before the adoption of SF 496. The question that’s actually before this court is whether this overbroad and vague statute is constitutional, and it’s not.”
SF 496 requires that public-school libraries contain only “age-appropriate materials,” defined to specifically exclude “descriptions or visual depictions of a sex act” as defined in Iowa Code.
The legislation was passed by Republican lawmakers and signed into law by Gov. Kim Reynolds in May 2023. It went into effect last summer, but was halted in December before enforcement measures, including possible disciplinary action for educators, began.
“As a mom, I know how important it is for parents to have a say in what books and materials their kids have access to,” Bird said in a statement. “Today, we made the case in court to defend Iowa’s law that protects kids, families, and parental rights. It is common sense.”
In his order blocking the law until litigation is settled, U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Locher called the law “wildly overbroad."
nonpareilonline.com
The case could have far-reaching implications for free speech and censorship in education beyond Iowa.
Members of the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in St. Paul appeared reticent, based on their questioning of attorneys during nearly a half hour of arguments, to affirm a district court’s order granting the preliminary injunction.
Two federal lawsuits have been filed arguing the state law violates the free speech rights of students, authors and book publishers. The challenges were filed by Lambda Legal and the ACLU of the Iowa on behalf of LGBTQ+ students, their families and the LGBTQ+ advocacy organization Iowa Safe Schools, and another from publishing company Penguin Random House on behalf of authors, a parent, teachers and school librarians.
Two of the three judges on the panel questioned whether plaintiffs should be challenging the state law as a whole as opposed to filing more specific lawsuits against specific school districts over their removal of books and interpretation of the law.
U.S. Circuit Judge Ralph Erickson, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, suggested litigants should take small bites and try to “slap it down, piece by piece” by suing individual school districts.
“Because I think what's going on here is you've got the school districts are in a dead panic,” Erickson said. “They're applying (the law) more broadly than the language of the statute itself provides.”
He said certain books that have been removed from some schools, such as “1984,” “Animal Farm” and “The Picture of Dorian Gray,” are "probably seen to have artistic merits such that application of this statute is inappropriate.”
U.S. Circuit Judge James Loken, a George H.W. Bush appointee, questioned “why does the First Amendment care” if a book is removed from a school library as long as it's still available at a local bookstore.
Attorney Fred Sperling, representing the book publishers, said school libraries are intended to provide access to books for all children, regardless of whether they can buy it at the bookstore, and that students have a right to receive information that is age-appropriate. The law, though, makes no differentiation as to what is appropriate for certain grade levels.
“There's no distinction whatsoever as to age, and so books that might be fully appropriate for a 12th-grader might not be for a ninth-grader or sixth-grader or third-grader or kindergartner; it makes no distinction whatsoever,” Sperling said.
He also disagreed with Erickson and Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan, who argued for the injunction to be overturned, claiming there are routes for “as-applied” challenges to the state law.
“The question before this court is not whether some of the books the state defendants can point to may be constitutionally removed from school libraries,” he said. “They can, and they have been under existing law before the adoption of SF 496. The question that’s actually before this court is whether this overbroad and vague statute is constitutional, and it’s not.”
What does the Iowa law do?
Iowa Senate File 496 bans books and curriculum depicting or describing sex acts from school libraries or classrooms, with the exemption of religious texts. It also prohibits programs, “promotion” and instruction about sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through sixth grade, outside of health curriculum.SF 496 requires that public-school libraries contain only “age-appropriate materials,” defined to specifically exclude “descriptions or visual depictions of a sex act” as defined in Iowa Code.
The legislation was passed by Republican lawmakers and signed into law by Gov. Kim Reynolds in May 2023. It went into effect last summer, but was halted in December before enforcement measures, including possible disciplinary action for educators, began.
Iowa AG defends law
Iowa Republican Attorney General Brenna Bird appealed the district court’s ruling halting the law, arguing some schools may be applying the law too broadly.“As a mom, I know how important it is for parents to have a say in what books and materials their kids have access to,” Bird said in a statement. “Today, we made the case in court to defend Iowa’s law that protects kids, families, and parental rights. It is common sense.”
In his order blocking the law until litigation is settled, U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Locher called the law “wildly overbroad."
Federal appeals court weighs lifting Iowa school library book ban
The case could have far-reaching implications for free speech and censorship in education beyond Iowa.
