Two bills introduced by Democrats in the Michigan state House aim to empower librarians faced with community challenges against literature deemed improper for children by their parents.
On Wednesday, House Dems brought House Bills 6034 and 6035 were referred to second reading, which means neither bill will likely be discussed during the legislative session that ends Friday, Dec. 13.
The “Public Library Freedom to Read Act” and “District Library Freedom to Read Act” would grant librarians wide discretion to reject book challenges. HB6034 addresses public libraries, which are controlled at a local level, and HB 6035 addresses district libraries, which are governed independently.
Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial
The bills would alter the methods by which parents and citizens could “challenge” dubious books, Both bills would seek to put barriers in the way of people who believe that some books do not belong in some sections of the library and request that they be removed.
The Coalition to Rescue Michigan had dubbed the bills “The Obscenity in Libraries Act.”
If passed, the CRM says the bills “would make it almost impossible for parents to challenge library books that contain obscenity – including shocking lurid depictions of children.”
CRM’s statement continues: “Under the bill, a reason or basis for a request for removing a book cannot be, among other things, “sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression” – prohibiting graphic depictions of sex and marketing sexual mutilation to children from being grounds for removing a book. The bill adds that only a court order could declare any particular book to be too obscene to be distributed in libraries.”
Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial
CRM concludes: “Knowing how hideous this legislation is, Democrats introduced the bill two days AFTER the November 5 election to prevent voters from responding at the polls.”
The bills require that “the requester has read the entire material before filing the request for reconsideration,” effectively allowing credentialed library officials to quiz book challengers. The bill also states that books may not be challenged on the basis of “subject matter, content, or viewpoint of material,” leaving very little room for any parental challenge to be effective.
The bills also state that no book may be challenged on account of of the book’s promotion of any “religion, race, color, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, height, weight, familial status, or marital status of the author or because the subject matter, content, or viewpoint of the material involves religion, race, color, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, height, weight, familial status, or marital status.”
If the bills become law, “The Michigan Attorney General may, on behalf of the Library of Michigan, compel the public library to adopt a policy and the attorney general, a resident of the public library’s legal service area or public library’s contracted service area may commence a civil action including a temporary or permanent injunction to prevent the public library from unlawful removal of material or to compel the public library to return material to the collection that are removed in violation of this act.”
Rep. Veronica Paiz, D-Harper Woods, introduced HB 6034 and Rep. Carol Glanville, D-Grandville, introduced HB 6035.
The Michigan Library Association celebrated the proposals in a recent press release, misleadingly claiming that the legislation would address “book banning and censorship issues.”
However, concerns over censorship and book banning may be overblown. Many people who challenge the wide dissemination of certain books are not attempting to ban books, as the left would have it. Instead, most challenges have to do with the content of the book being appropriate for certain age groups.