Pages tagged "book bans"
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.
Read MoreShowing up matters. Even when you're the only one.
{Post written in collaboration with Izzy Mason, New Braunfels ISD parent.}
Fighting book bans and censorship in Texas is not for the faint of heart. Not a single victory for the freedom to read has been won by people staying home and staying silent. The only "wins" we've had, are when people find the courage to stand up and speak out. Keep showing up. Keep speaking up. Even if your voice shakes. Even if you're the only one. Our kids, our libraries, and our freedom to read are worth the fight.
NBISD parent, Izzy Mason, delivered this pointed public comment during the open forum at a recent New Braunfels ISD school board meeting. The transcript and video of her comment are shared here, with permission. May this example bring you some inspiration and motivation to speak up, too.
Read MoreTake action: stop national censorship bill, H.R. 7661.
United States House Resolution 7661 threatens to expand Texas’s unconstitutional, anti-LGBTQ+ censorship laws and local school board policies to every public school in the country.
Read MoreNew Braunfels ISD bans 600+ books, ages up 800+ titles using AI & overly-restrictive selection criteria.
*This post is part of a series by Texas Freedom to Read Project, utilizing records collected by volunteers through Public Information Requests to document the impact of laws like House Bill 900, Senate Bill 12, and Senate Bill 13.*
New Braunfels ISD made headlines at the start of the 2025-2026 school year, when the school board abruptly ordered the closure of all secondary libraries under the guise of ensuring compliance with Senate Bill 13. This decision followed public (baseless) allegations, complaints, and harassment of district staff and trustees by in and out of district activists over library books.
After vocal community outcry, the NBISD school board instructed the district to re-open the libraries, while simultaneously ordering an extensive internal review of the district’s entire library collection at all campus levels.
The school libraries may be open- but according to public documents obtained by a volunteer for Texas Freedom to Read Project- books are being removed and restricted at an alarming rate.
Read MoreA Children’s Book, a Packed Library, and a Community Standing for the Right to Read
{Guest Post by Miranda Williamson} What began as a petition to remove a single trans-affirming children’s book became a town debacle as over 100 people packed into the Salado Library. Parking was full and spilling into the nearby grocery store and gas station lots. Outside, protesters with Indivisible Centex held signs proudly displaying slogans like “Your beliefs don’t control my reading,” and urged attendees to “Choose knowledge over fear.”
Read MoreTexas Freedom to Read Project Responds to Supreme Court’s Denial in Little v. Llano
Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court chose not to take up Little v. Llano County, allowing the en-banc decision of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to stand. We at Texas Freedom to Read Project are disappointed and gravely concerned about what this means not only for Texans, Mississippians, and Louisianans (those in the Fifth Circuit), but for the future of libraries and the freedom to read across this country.
Read MorePress Release: Texas Freedom to Read Project Responds to Supreme Court’s Denial of Review in Little v. Llano County
The Texas Freedom to Read Project (TXFTRP) is expressing deep concern after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review Little v. Llano County, allowing the Fifth Circuit’s ruling to stand, a decision that significantly weakens First Amendment protections for public-library patrons across America, but especially across Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
The Fifth Circuit held that patrons no longer have the constitutional right to receive information and ideas in the form of library books and the concurring opinion went as far as to embrace the unfounded concept that libraries’ decisions about which books to remove are “government speech.” TXFTRP warns that this logic opens the door for local officials to purge books based on ideology rather than legitimate collection-development practices and turn public libraires into government propaganda centers.
“This decision effectively tells government officials they can remove books simply because they don’t like the ideas in them,” said Laney Hawes, co-founder of TXFTRP. “That is the opposite of what public libraries are meant to be.”
Contrary to claims that the case centered on “sexually explicit” materials, the 17 books removed from Llano County libraries included titles about racism, LGBTQ+ identity, civil rights, and American history, alongside several humorous children’s books. None were obscene.
“When you look at the actual list of books, it’s clear, this isn’t about protecting kids, it’s about controlling the flow of ideas.”said Frank Strong, co-founder. “It is about removing viewpoints some officials find uncomfortable.”
The dissenting judges in the Fifth Circuit underscored this point, warning that the majority’s ruling overturns decades of First Amendment precedent and ignores the political motivations behind the book removals.
“If this ruling stands unchallenged, any group with enough influence can pressure officials to pull books they disagree with,” said Anne Russey, co-founder. “That threatens the intellectual freedom of everyone in America and could be the end of libraries as we know them.”
TXFTRP is calling on communities nationwide to stay engaged and defend their libraries. “We need more Americans willing to show up, join library boards, run for school board, attend council meetings,” Hawes added. “The freedom to read and the future of American libraries depends on ordinary people refusing to let censorship become the norm.”
You can read TXFTRP’s full statement here.
Pinkalicious and 700+ other titles removed from Lamar Consolidated ISD, near Houston
No - this is not the latest satirical headline at The Onion. This is reality for the 49,000+ students who attend Lamar Consolidated ISD schools.
A public information request filed by Texas Freedom to Read Project confirmed that LCISD removed over 700 books from classrooms and school libraries at the start of the 2025-2026 school year.
Read MoreStories from Deep in the Heart of Texas: Nacogdoches ISD
The Daily Sentinel reported on May 8, 2025 that the district placed over 100 high school library books behind a "parent opt-in" restricted section of the library, after being contacted by a political activist and known book banning bully. Book banners have been sending intimidating emails containing hundreds of book titles they falsely claim are "illegal under HB 900" to school districts for the past year.
Read MoreSenate Bill 13: Another Step Towards Censorship, Not Solutions
Something no representative on either side of the political aisle seems to understand about Senate Bill 13 is that it’s not “House Bill 900 is not working” as the book banners like to claim. It’s that the 40 or so book banners who are driving their movement for the whole state refuse to take “no” for an answer.
Read More