Judge rules Arkansas law threatening librarians with jail unconstitutional. (Anumita Kaur, WaPo, December 26, 2024)

Once again, a federal court has remedied First Amendment violations in Arkansas.  Three cheers for judicial independence and Article III of our United States Constitution.  From The Washington Post:

Judge rules Arkansas law threatening librarians with jail unconstitutional

The law, which threatened imprisonment if librarians or booksellers provided ‘harmful’ content to minors, violates the First Amendment, a federal judge ruled.

Two children read a book at the library. (iStock)

By Anumita Kaur

A federal judge on Monday struck down key parts of an Arkansas law that threatened librarians and booksellers with imprisonment if they were found to have provided “harmful” content to a minor.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks ruled that two parts of Arkansas Act 372 — which Republican Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed in 2023 — are overly broad and vague, and violated librarians’, booksellers’ and patrons’ First Amendment rights.

The two parts of the law that were struck down would have established a criminal misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in prison, for librarians and booksellers who distribute “harmful” material to a minor. It also would have required local governments to create oversight boards to review challenged content, which often deal with themes of race and sexuality. The ruling, which will likely be challenged, comes as a growing number of GOP-controlled statehouses have considered similar laws that threaten librarians with prison.

“Up until the passage of Act 372, it appears that Arkansas’s more pressing concern with respect to librarians was that they be insulated from meritless claims and time-wasting prosecutions,” Brooks wrote. “Times have changed.”

If the statute’s purpose “was to protect younger minors from accessing inappropriate sexual content in libraries and bookstores, the law will only achieve that end at the expense of everyone else’s First Amendment rights,” Brooks, who was appointed by former president Barack Obama, said. “The law deputizes librarians and booksellers as the agents of censorship; when motivated by the fear of jail time, it is likely they will shelve only books fit for young children and segregate or discard the rest.”

The state plans to challenge the decision. “I respect the court’s ruling and will appeal,” Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin said Monday. Sanders’s office did not respond to request for comment Thursday; the governor has said to local media that the law “is just common sense: schools and libraries shouldn’t put obscene material in front of our kids” and will work with Griffin to appeal the ruling.

Librarians, booksellers and their advocates celebrated the win — they argue that such a law amounts to censorship, and would have a chilling effect on libraries and bookshops in the state.

At least 27 states considered 100 bills that restrict library materials or threaten librarians with jail time or thousands in fines this year. At least three of those have become law, The Washington Post found. That added to nearly a dozen similar measures enacted over the last three years across 10 states.

Lawmakers that propose these bills contend they are necessary because school and public libraries contain graphic sexual material that should not be available to children. Arkansas state Sen. Dan Sullivan (R), who introduced Arkansas Act 372, said at the time that the law protects children and doesn’t harm librarians unless they’re doing something awful. “If they don’t knowingly violate [the law], they’re free and clear,” Sullivan said.

But others say bills like Sullivan’s are ideologically driven censorship cloaked as concern for children, noting that as book challenges spiked to historic highs over the past two years, the majority of objectionstargeted books by and about LGBTQ people and people of color, including “All Boys Aren’t Blue” by George M. Johnson and “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe.

“Our libraries and bookstores are critical spaces for learning, exploration and connection,” John Williams, legal director for the ACLU of Arkansas, said in a statement. “By striking down these provisions, the court has safeguarded the right of every Arkansan to access ideas and information without fear of censorship or prosecution.”

After Sullivan’s bill was signed into law, a coalition of organizations, including the Arkansas Library Association and various bookstores, challenged it in court. Brooks, the federal judge, temporarily blocked the law’s provisions to punish librarians and booksellers and establish oversight boards from taking effect while the lawsuit wound its way through the court.

“This decision sends a strong message that censorship and government overreach have no place in our libraries or our democracy,” John Chrastka, executive director of advocacy group EveryLibrary, said in a statement. “It’s a win for librarians, for the right to read, and for the Arkansas library communities who have fought tirelessly to protect access to books and ideas.”

By Anumita Kaur

Anumita Kaur is a general assignment reporter for The Washington Post, where she covers breaking news and writes of-the-moment features. She has previously reported for the Los Angeles Times and Guam Pacific Daily News. follow on X@anumitakaur