Signs are posted in the young adult section of the Autauga-Prattville Public Library on Feb. 23, 2024. (Ralph Chapoco/ Alabama Reflector)
A group challenging restrictive policies at the Autauga-Prattville Public Library last week renewed its call for a federal court to block those policies, arguing recent changes by the library do not address their concerns.
Read Freely Alabama, a nonprofit organization that supports freedom of speech, along with the Alabama Library Association and patrons of the library, filed the motion in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, saying the amended policies unconstitutionally violate patrons’ free speech rights and discriminate based on content.
“Our clients renewed their motion for a preliminary injunction because the Board’s policy continues to injure library patrons every day it is in effect,” said Jessica Morton, senior counsel with Democracy Forward, a nonprofit legal services and research organization representing Read Freely. “In the two months since we filed our original complaint, more and more books have been removed from the library, in violation of their constitutional rights.”
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The motion follows a motion from the library’s Board of Trustees to have the suit dismissed, citing recent state changes to circulation policies which it said made the original complaint moot.
Read Freely; the Alabama Library Association and individuals who use the library filed suit in May , arguing that a “selection criteria” adopted by the board was overly broad, restricted materials that are not obscene and violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Messages were left with the legal teams representing both parties seeking comment.
Shortly after the original lawsuit was filed, the Alabama Public Library Service (APLS), the agency responsible for disbursing state funds to local libraries to assist with their operations, new rules that could restrict money from libraries deemed by the APLS to be sexually inappropriate .
The new APLS code requires local libraries to adopt a materials selection policy to help ensure that children are protected from having access to sexually explicit materials that are inappropriate. It also required statements of where sexually explicit material will be located; advanced approval of advertisements and notices for material; and guidelines to ensure there is no sexually explicit or inappropriate content in the children’s section of a library.
The Autauga-Prattville library board then amended the policies it established in February to adhere to the new rules. The board claimed those changes rendered the original complaint meaningless.
“The Board has terminated the policies challenged by the plaintiffs in this case and adopted superseding policies to conform its policies to a revised administrative rule of the Alabama Public Library Service governing eligibility for state funding,” the Board’s motion states.
Read Freely Alabama argues the new policies do not materially alter the policies set in February, remain discriminatory and continue to violate the U.S. Constitution and people’s free speech rights.
“The policy facially captures material that is not obscene; prohibits vague and capacious categories that include non-obscene material; fails to distinguish between younger and older minors; and fails to distinguish between minors and adults,” the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit also argued that simply because there is sexual content in a book, it does not mean the book is obscene. The policies adopted do not account for literary material value, the plaintiffs allege, and that they could apply to library materials which are recommended for children, such as the Harry Potter series and classics such as “The Great Gatsby.”
The suit also argues that the new policies discriminate based on content because it prevents people from obtaining and reading materials solely because it contains descriptions related to a host of themes listed in the policies, from sexual intercourse to gender identity.
“The board failed to tailor the policy narrowly to a compelling interest in protecting children from obscenity — or, indeed, to meaningfully tailor it at all,” the complaint states.
Read Freely Alabama also names several individuals who are not able to obtain materials that were removed from circulation because of the policies that the Board adopted in June.
Amber Frey, a Prattville resident, borrowed “The Hate U Give” several months ago, but the lawsuit states that the book is no longer available at the library because of the policies that were enacted.
Attorneys for the board argue that the policies that the plaintiffs challenged in the original complaint are no longer in place, replaced with language that aligned with the APLS administrative code changes that required local libraries in Alabama to adopt policies aimed at protecting children from obscene materials.
“The Board’s decision to terminate the challenged policies and adopt the superseding policies reflects a rejection of the challenged conduct that is both permanent and complete,” Taylor states in his motion.
The motion also argued that Read Freely and others lack standing when they filed the original complaint. The original challenge was that the policies interfered with their right to check out and read books that are part of the library’s circulation.
“No court throughout American history has ever held that the Constitution guarantees a right to check out and read books from a public library at taxpayer expense,” Taylor states in his motion to dismiss. “There is no such federal right. Nor has the Alabama Legislature obligated the establishment of public libraries in the state to guarantee any such ‘right.’”
The modifications were finalized after the APLS completed a process that took several months, which included accepting written comments submitted by the public along with hosting a meeting in which more than 100 people spoke to express their opinions on Ivey’s proposed administrative code changes.
Clarification: The story was updated to name other plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the Autauga-Prattville Public Library.
DONATE: SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST
Most Popular
Comments / 0