EveryLibrary and Texas Freedom to Read Project Candidate Survey 2026

Texas Freedom to Read Project has once again partnered with EveryLibrary to survey Texas school board candidates about their positions on school book bans, the freedom to read, and the value of libraries and public schools in Texas. Surveys were sent to candidates for the May elections in the 150 largest school districts in Texas. Thirty-one respondents filled out the survey completely.

This is the second time Texas Freedom to Read Project and EveryLibrary have conducted this survey. In 2024, 22 candidates completed the survey, allowing us to identify several trends that have since shaped political battles around school library books.

Whereas 2024’s survey revealed deep divisions in the ways Texans approach restrictions on instructional materials and library books, this year’s survey suggests a growing consensus on the value of libraries and librarians in schools as well as a recognition of the importance of the freedom to read for Texas students.

A shift towards support of the freedom to read

Overall, this year’s group of respondents was both more committed to and more outspoken about the freedom to read than the group two years ago.

While several of the candidates who responded have the backing of groups like Moms for Liberty or True Texas Project, the tone of the responses has changed.

In 2024, only 50% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the following statement:

“School libraries are places of voluntary inquiry and not required reading for students. School libraries should, therefore, have books and materials with a multitude of viewpoints and ideas. Removing books from library shelves because of disagreement with or disapproval of ideas or viewpoints within the books is wrong and violates the First Amendment rights of students.”

This year, that number rose to 74%. While six respondents strongly disagreed with that statement in 2024, this year, not a single candidate who answered the survey did.

Similarly, in 2024 only half of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that “school libraries with robust and diverse collection that include age relevant books that address topics like race, social justice, sexual assault, sexual education, consent, LGBTQ+ issues, etc., are important to serving and meeting the needs of our students.” In 2026, that percentage also rose to 74%.

On every measure, this group shifted towards supporting the freedom to read from the baseline of the 2024 survey. In both 2024 and this year, we asked candidates how strongly they agreed or disagreed with the following statement:

School libraries are places of voluntary inquiry and not required reading for students. School libraries should, therefore, have books and materials with a multitude of viewpoints and ideas. Removing books from library shelves because of disagreement with or disapproval of ideas or viewpoints within the books is wrong and violates the First Amendment rights of students.

In 2024, that was one of the most contentious questions on the survey, with six respondents strongly disagreeing and only half agreeing or strongly agreeing. This year, 74% agreed or strongly agreed, and no candidates strongly disagreed.

Moms for Liberty positions aren’t just unpopular; they’re rejected with near unanimity

Two of the highest-scoring statements on this year’s survey were “School district library acquisitions policies and book content guidelines should ensure that when library materials are evaluated for appropriateness, determinations are made by evaluating materials as a whole and in context rather than reducing books to rubrics or checklists” and “A parent's right to restrict or remove access to a book or other instructional resource, extends only to their own child, and not anyone else's child.”

97% of respondents agreed with the former statement, and 94% agreed with the latter.

This is also a shift from 2024, when those 68% and 77% of respondents agreed with those statements, respectively. These statements directly challenge both the orthodoxy and actions of groups like Moms for Liberty and Citizens Defending Freedom, which regularly demand the removal of books based on out-of-context passages and which assert a right to make parenting and instructional decisions for every family in a district. As candidate Dave Jimenez of Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD put it: 

“Any book can be made to look objectionable if you pull a single passage out of context. That is exactly the tactic that has driven many of the book challenges across Texas. A trained librarian evaluates a book as a complete work, considering its themes, its literary merit, its relevance to the curriculum, and its appropriateness for the students it serves. Rubrics and checklists reduce that professional judgment to a mechanical exercise that strips away context and produces absurd outcomes.”

Notably, even candidates endorsed by Moms for Liberty agreed with these statements. Gabriel Gonzales, Moms for Liberty – Harris County’s endorsed candidate in Clear Creek ISD, said, “As an educator, I believe materials should always be reviewed in full context, with consideration of educational value, age-appropriateness, and district policy. Thoughtful review processes help ensure decisions remain focused on student learning rather than isolated excerpts.” 

As the American Library Association recently related in its 2026 report on The State of America’s Libraries, organized pressure groups—not individual parents—are driving the book-banning movement in the United States. So it’s striking that organizations like Moms for Liberty can no longer find candidates who will support their most extreme positions.

Anti-LGBTQ sentiment decreased but remains a factor in Texas school board races.

In 2024, we noted that 50% of respondents said that age-relevant books with LGBTQ characters should either never (23%) be available to students or only available to high school students (27%). 

The good news is that in 2026 that percentage dropped—only 16% of respondents this year believe students should never have access to books with LGBTQ characters, and another 16% believe such access should be limited to high school students. 

Still, too many candidates still see such content as inherently objectionable, arguing for greater age restrictions on it and suggesting that content acknowledging the existence of LGTBQ people is somehow unfit for younger readers. 

Candidates recognize a new legal landscape and understand they must follow the law. They aren’t necessarily sure how, or happy about what the legislature has been doing. 

Recent laws in Texas, like 2025’s Senate Bill 12 and Senate Bill 13, have changed how books are vetted in schools, adding responsibilities to school boards and allowing for the creation of parental library advisory committees to supervise the purchase and retention of library materials. At the same time, districts have sought to incorporate language from the Texas Penal Code into library policies, referencing legal definitions of “obscene” and “harmful” materials in attempts to restrict books available to students.

Survey respondents were torn in their responses to these developments. The majority (55%) said they do not support the creation of School Library Advisory Committees as outlined in Senate Bill 13. Jimenez, of Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD, wrote, “Community input on library collections is not inherently a bad idea. But the advisory councils created under SB 13 have been used in practice as vehicles for broad, politically motivated removal of materials rather than as genuine advisory bodies improving collection quality.”

And a plurality (45%) said they do not support revisions to library policies that reference the Penal Code’s definitions of “obscene” and “harmful material.” DeAndrea Fleming of DeSoto ISD explained, “School libraries require age-appropriate educational standards, not broad legal definitions that weren’t designed for classrooms.”

But those were the two least agreed-upon questions in the survey, and more candidates described themselves as “neutral” on those statements than on any others. In general, though, candidates seemed to resent meddling from state lawmakers in local education decisions. As Brian Pollard of Lewisville ISD put it, “People in faraway places deciding what is right for particular students in a particular school can never allow for the nuances of a high-level AP class discussion or the sensibilities of a local parent group.”

Messages that work

The data from Every Library / Texas Freedom to Read Project’s survey shows that Texas school board candidates are ready to push back on the rhetoric and tactics that have created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation around library books in the past five years. Respondents overwhelmingly recognized the right of parents to direct their own children’s education, the importance of local control, and the understanding that books can be misleadingly presented when passages are taken out of context. 

Further, respondents generally understood that students benefit from freely choosing age-relevant reading material, and that reflecting the full diversity of a community includes allowing access to books that deal with race, social justice, sexual education, consent, and LGBTQ+ issues.

Most importantly, the survey once again shows that support for and trust in libraries and librarians is a mainstream position—and that while attacks on our libraries may not be relenting, they are increasingly coming from an unpopular fringe.

Candidates in their own words

The survey asked candidates to share their thoughts “on the recent tide of book challenges, book removals, and censorship in Texas libraries and Texas schools.” Here were some of their responses:

“The culture war on books in Texas reminds me of Fahrenheit 451. In that story, the attempt to remove books was never really about the books. It was about controlling what people think and eliminating freedom. That is exactly what we are watching unfold in Texas schools and libraries today. These challenges are not coming from concerned parents sitting at kitchen tables. They are partisan agendas being organized and pushed into our schools. “ -Tiffany Auzenne "Asonye" Katy ISD Trustee Candidate

“It seems to be an effort to make marginalized people invisible. This is actively harmful to our society as a whole. “ -April Adams, Hutto ISD Trustee Candidate 

“I am running as a school board candidate because how our district responded to 3 parent's complaints about material published by a visiting author. They cancelled the visiting author and did not provide any information to district parents/students about what happened. “ -Bianca Cerqueira, Alamo Heights ISD Trustee Candidate

“I have been heartbroken by the censorship in Texas, as it undermines the professional expertise of educators and restricts students' access to the diverse perspectives necessary for a well-rounded education. While I respect a parent’s right to guide their own child’s reading, removing books from school libraries based on individual objections denies other families their own educational choices. I believe we must protect our libraries as inclusive spaces and rely on formal, transparent review policies that prioritize educational merit over ideological challenges.” -Carrie Bruce, Mesquite ISD Trustee Candidate

“The focus on challenging books is a distraction from issues that ACTUALLY harm our children. “ -Jessica Cain, San Marcos ISD Trustee Candidate

“It's difficult for me to believe that there is ever a need to literally discard a book because someone considers it so on their merit.  We all need to understand that knowledge is power and is not to be used as a negative tool.” -Anita Martinez-Strickland Denton ISD Candidate

Click here to access the full data set of trustee candidate responses.