(NEW YORK)— PEN America said today it was dismayed that a federal appeals court lifted a temporary injunction against the enforcement of the SF 496 law in Iowa that led to over 3,000 books being removed from public schools. The free expression group called the law, which can now be implemented for the upcoming school year, “a perfect recipe for censorship.”
However, the group also said it was encouraged by one bright spot in Friday’s decision: the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals rejection of the dangerous idea that the removal of books from school libraries constitutes government speech.
“As we have already seen, Iowa’s SF 496 is a perfect recipe for censorship,” said Jonathan Friedman, Sy Sims director of US Free Expression programs at PEN America. “The vague language combined with the threat of discipline and overwhelming political pressure led to thousands of book bans in Iowa before the law was enjoined. Now that it is set to take effect again, we are deeply concerned that Iowa students will return to schools full of empty shelves.”
Signed into law in May 2023, SF 496 requires all public school library materials to be “age-appropriate” and prohibits any texts that include descriptions or depictions of a “sex act.” The law also includes a “Don’t Say Gay” provision that prohibits instruction related to sexual orientation and gender identity in grades K-6. According to reporting by the Des Moines Register, public schools across the state began removing books in the fall to comply with the law before it was originally to take effect in January 2024. That month though, a district court issued a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of what is called SF 496’s “Library Program,” in its decision on parallel lawsuits brought by major publishing houses with authors and LGBTQ advocacy groups. That injunction led some districts to return over 1,000 of the removed books back to their shelves.
In April, PEN America filed an amicus brief in support of plaintiffs in the two lawsuits before the Eighth Circuit, arguing that the law mandating book removals violates the Constitution, undermines public education, and “constitutes grave government overreach that has caused substantial harm to Iowan students, the writers who aim to reach them, and the larger culture of free expression.”
The appeals court decision now sends the case back to the lower court to weigh its constitutionality and allows the library program to go into effect in the meantime.
Significantly, the court rejected the state’s argument that the removal of library books is government speech, not subject to First Amendment scrutiny. The state’s novel interpretation of the government speech doctrine is increasingly common among state governments looking to censor curricula and library materials. The state of Florida, for example, has used similar arguments in multiple lawsuits related to book bans and educational gag orders. In the opinion, the Eighth Circuitn found that “the Supreme Court has not extended the government speech doctrine to the placement and removal of books in public school libraries.”
“We are heartened that the judge declined to extend the government speech doctrine to book removals from school libraries, which would lay a foundation for ideological state censorship that does not have to answer to the First Amendment,” Friedman said. “This was a dangerous and unsupported argument when Florida tried it, and it is in Iowa, too. We are hopeful that as the lower court makes its decision, the freedom to read will prevail.”
About PEN America
PEN America stands at the intersection of literature and human rights to protect free expression in the United States and worldwide. We champion the freedom to write, recognizing the power of the word to transform the world. Our mission is to unite writers and their allies to celebrate creative expression and defend the liberties that make it possible. Learn more at pen.org.
Contact: Suzanne Trimel, [email protected], (201) 247-5057