A federal judge has overridden the wishes of a local school district in Alaska. From now on, federal judges will say what books can be in schools, and what books cannot.
Judge Sharon Gleason of the U.S. District Court of Alaska ordered that the Mat-Su Borough School District return all but 7 of the 56 books it removed in April 2023 to its shelves by Aug. 14.
The district had implemented a review committee to review and debate the merits of books that had been challenged by parents for appropriateness for various age levels.
Judge Gleason, known as an extremely liberal judge, said the review process amounts to official suppression of ideas and she doubted the constitutionality of the process, by which a committee assembled by the school board reviewed the books in what not an arbitrary or capricious way.
The school district had returned several books to the shelves on its own, after the committee reviewed them at the request of parents.
The judge has said that seven books can be removed from circulation entirely. If the district wants the other books to be removed, it will have to give the judge a written reason within a few days.
The issue is this: Do school districts have the right to curate library materials or must they include only the books that this judge says are OK?
Savannah Fletcher, who is running for Senate, was the attorney for the Northern Justice Project, which challenged the school district. She and the ACLU say the school district has no right to remove any books from school libraries, no matter what.
“The court’s decision today affirms free speech and First Amendment rights that all Alaskans are afforded under the law,” said Ruth Botstein, Legal Director for the ACLU of Alaska. “Alaska students do not benefit when ideas are censored. This is a win for young people in our state.”
Generally school libraries have had to be sensitive to not putting pornographic or books with satanic themes in the stacks, but now a judge has supplanted the reasoning of the local people.
The books that Gleason said can be removed are: Call Me By Your Name, Verity, It Ends With Us, Ugly Love, A Court of Mist and Fury, A Court of Silver Flames, and You.
This will be an interesting appeal.
Don’t have a library and solve the problem and blame the left and crooked courts for the loss of a library.
My thoughts exactly… Sad day Judge Gleason. Her comments per the school’s efforts should raise burning red flags “the review process amounts to official suppression of ideas and she doubted the constitutionality of the process, by which a committee assembled by the school board reviewed the books in what not an arbitrary or capricious way.” Yet this judge ordered that 7 could be removed. And this isn’t arbitrary and capricious, how so exactly? The Mat-Su must appeal this decision; other school districts should join the lawsuit. This is absurd.
For now, all libraries are under federal control. Team ACLU(less) , salveanna fletcher , and judge gleason will dictate to previously local entities what they are allowed to do. Sanctioning perversion is one step to their goal of removing ALL limits on sexual deviancy including age limits. Their new definition of freedom of speech erases locally elected representative government. Free to obey their desires until we can’t take any more.
“Libraries are places homeless people go to shave and do BM” – Peter Griffin, 2000
Hmmm, let me guess, some older liberal d bag man hater, who’s probly never spent a lot of time around younger kids, probly was not noticed or part of much in school as a youth or as a young adult , used the American tax payer to go to some liberal art school and got a Cracker Jack law degree somewhere, lastly probably appointed by either Clinton or Obama, basicly a life long buerocrat parasite who briefly practiced law some where, tell
Me how do these sick people get into positions of power,
Totally pathetic and disgusting.
Are you tired of being ruled by these low quality people yet?
Of note is that Judge Sharon Gleason of the U.S. District Court of Alaska appears unmarried and does not have children. I wonder what kind of “lifestyle” she lives.
Fools think they can tell people what or what not to read. They bash the 1st amendment while crying for their 2nd amendment rights. Without the 1st you won’t have a 2nd. Think fools think while you stillcan.
Groomer alert
Michaela, I would strongly encourage you to take a “history of the constitution” and a constitution course, as it is clear you have very little understanding of the purpose of the 2nd amendment. You also seem to be unaware of what the 1st amendment actually says or does.
There are several institutions offering online courses on this subject free of charge.
No one is curtailing YOUR 1st amendment right to read any of this material. This lawsuit while on the surface dealing with the procedure employed by the school district to review materials, is about parental input regarding material that is consider by a large number of parents not age appropriate for school age children. It is a responsible community response to a community concern. Unlike your assertion there were no bonfires in the school parking lots, instead the books were taken of the shelves to BE REVIEWED!
It should further be noted that all school libraries or libraries in general make book selections and choices at all times, as budget limitations and space issues, prohibit them from purchasing EVERY book that is out there, so why is this any different, especially considering the target audience?
It seem interesting that parents, who wish for their children to have access to such material, do not simply purchase the material in question to have available for their child at home, just like many parents purchase religious material, as that also is unavailable for their children at school. Are you including religious material in your assertion?
No reason at all for the Borough to listen to this judge
Appropriate action is to ignore the judge and not return the books.
Judge has no authority in the matter.
If a judge orders the school to kill every Christian child…do you ignore them or carry it out? Serious, this is not a rhetorical question.
Some of the facts of the case are not included in this article. First, the books were removed unilaterally BEFORE the advisory committee was formed. This was the most important reason why the case was argued as a first amendment issue. Second, the seven books that could legally be removed were determined by the review committee–after it formed–to be inappropriate. Third, individual school boards members appointed persons they individually chose to serve on the review committee. Originally, the school board promised that they would appoint members by lottery, but then refused to do so. Fourth, one of the appointees had not even applied for the position, but was appointed after he promised a school board member that he would vote to remove all of the books, even though he had not read any of them. Fifth, a number of the books on the list were never in the Mat-Su school library to begin with. Others books that were not re-shelved had been stolen from the collection.
It is important to note that the judge agreed with the decision that some books were inappropriate only because they had undergone a formal process. Parents and others who find school library books can continue to successfully challenge them, but only if they follow the formal process. The article’s claim that only judges can decide what books can or cannot be on book shelves is incorrect, as this case aptly demonstrates. In short, if you don’t think a book should be on the shelf, follow the challenge process.
The challenge process: can you please describe this? Seems like these books were challenged and the lefties screamed and hollered, which started this whole big mess.
The issue of censorship is a complete red herring. If schools had unlimited budgets, they could buy every book for the libraries. But they don’t. By necessity they have to and should make choices of what books are the best go on the shelves. Parents have to make the same choice for books they buy for their kids at home.
Who should make that choice for local schools? That choice should be made by elected school board members. Of course they hate to do this so they rely on proxies like library associations to curate lists for purchase as does the ASD. This allows the board members to evade responsibility. When books like “Gender Queer” appear on the shelves, books which contain explicit graphic depictions and descriptions of sexual acts, the board blames it on remote professional library associations which recommended them. Now a judge has made the decision and provided even more insulation for the local school board from accountability to the parents, taxpayers, and students.
Nothing is going to improve until accountability returns to the school board members. The judge has made this worse.
Pete–The book, GenderQueer, was never in Mat-Su school libraries.
So, Laura Ingalls Wilder and Uncle Tom’s Cabin can be put back on the shelves?
Well, I won’t be voting for Sharon Gleason!
Rene–Judge Gleason is a federal judge, appointed by the president, and therefore not up for election.
Here in Alaska, the “votes” for any judge don’t get them removed anyway. I never understood why we “vote” on “retaining” judges when our votes are merely our opinions.
First amendment says “ The CONGRESS Shall make no law”, well neither the school board nor the district is the Congress, but the federal courts are by creation and extension in fact THE CONGRESS. Therefore they have NO JURISDICTION. Nullify them. They have no real power unless we tuck our tails. I say, burn the foul writings, on the steps of our Federal Court. Just as our forefathers would have done. The Federal Court is in rebellion against the Constitution. This cannot stand. Where is our Governor and His Attorney General? Where are the patriots? Stand up and speak up, or be counted among the cowards!
Ah yes. Nothing says America and freedom like burning books. You must really miss Kristallnacht.
Appeal? There is no appeal to TYRANNY.
Check them out and forget to return them.
Weird how this decision should have stopped, with the school district. Lawfare in full view.
Fletcher is an ongoing problem.
Do what Idaho did- Sure, those mature books can be in the school library, just bring government issued ID stating the reader is over the age of 18 to able to check said books out. Store those books in the back, must show proof of age to check them out. Just like at a news stand buying a Penthouse.
“The School District has no right to remove any book from school libraries, no matter what”. Savannah Fletcher, how do books get into school libraries in the first place? If what MRA stated you believe is true, are schools required by your reasoning to have every book ever written on their shelves?
Tell the Federal Judge to go stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.
The “suppression of ideas?” (paragraphs 4 & 9) The only ideas they want to suppress are God’s ideas! Can’t have Bibles, ya know! And in so doing, they admit His existence and His Holy nature.
God has “ideas”? Good to know. Do you mean things like His mandate to commit genocide or His warrants for slavery? Those “ideas”?
I’m thankful every day we chose to homeschool our children!
So, does this mean the bible can now get put back on the shelves too? Will there be Christian sections in the libraries?
All the more reason to home school your kids. One more reason of many to dump the Dept. of Indoc……………er “Education”.
Comments are closed.