Submitted 6 months ago by pineapplelover@lemm.ee to [deleted]
I know Florida, Texas, and other counties have tried and succeeded to ban books, I wonder how that is even legal since we have the first amendment. I tried doing research on this since Huntington Beach is banning books and people were petitioning against that at the main library.
I made a little post asking people to petition on the Orange County sub.
Bans often rely on the obscenity exception to the 1st Amendment:
…findlaw.com/…/first-amendment-limits--obscenity.…
SCOTUS has never given a clear, well-defined, repeatable test to say exactly what “obscenity” even means, so local jurisdictions are free to push the envelope.
If that sounds like a pile of bullshit waiting to be exploited, yes, and that’s exactly why we’re seeing this happening.
Anybody push back? Saying lgbt and civil rights stuff is not “obscenity”?
You try arguing with idiots
You should instead be trying to get rid of the ‘obscenity’ exception itself, not just work around it.
It’s not a 1A issue, though. The government isn’t restricting your ability to purchase or own the book, they’re just saying it can’t be used in schools.
I wish there was no obscenity exception. I think all media deserves to exist regardless of its obscenity as long as it’s not directly harming someone (like certain types of porn for instance)
The problem is the obscenity exception is also used for things like preventing someone from walking around a public park with a giant sign covered in gore porn. Something like that I think is obviously pretty okay to ban, but clearly it gets misused for a lot of homophobic/transphobic type stuff.
Most of these bans are not about banning those books in general, they are about not making them available in schools or public libraries. The government can decide what to promote in its own institutions. People can still get those books from elsewhere: they can buy them online or in physical bookstores.
Isn’t that kind of the problem, though? A private organization can certainly censor themselves as they see fit, but the US government should not, no?
There’s a limited amount of space for books in schools and public libraries, so they have to make some decisions what to have in them and what not.
Also I think this is mostly being done by state governments, not the US (federal) government.
In the Netherlands, only one book I know of used to be banned (maybe it still is). The publishing rights of the work in question were claimed by the state in this instance, and they refused to allow publication of the book. The book in question was the Dutch translation of Hitlers "Mein Kampf".
As the author of that book is now dead since more than 70 years, the copyright has expired and it theoretically can be reproduced. It may be still on a list as ‘harmful for young persons’ or alike.
The Netherlands use the same copyright laws?
I always assumed that was just the US copyright system
The first ammendment isn’t unlimited there are a fair amount of restrictions. The ones that are allowed follow strict scrutiny, which is basically a two part test. There must be a compelling state interest, AND the law must use the least restive means possible to achieve that interest.
Most these book bans likely don’t meet that standard. They are allowed to exist because they are considered valid until ruled otherwise. To overrule these bans it would be required for someone to have standing that they are materially harmed by the ban. This is how most bans will stay, as proving someone has standing is pretty difficult in this case.
They’re also not banning the books, so there’s that. At least not in the sense that would require strict scrutiny.
When we talk about the legality of banning something, those laws are often on the federal level and apply to federal institutions. If an institution is state- or county-funded, they can have their own rules that supersede federal restrictions.
Not necessarily.
The incorporation doctrine of the 14th amendment applies the Bill of Rights to the states as well as federal government.
There’s a difference between a book being
As long as they don’t come for internet access, kids can get around book bans with things like Libby.
What’s that? Republicans are proposing an internet book ban bill call KOSA? Well good thing we have divided goverment. It will never pass.
Wait? Biden is supporting it? Well, that doesn’t mean… wait, Elizabeth Warren is a cosposonser? Wtf?
I’m sorry, WHAT?
Checked wikipedia myself this morning. Looks like they switched it from the state attorney generals deciding what is “harmful content” to the FTC. Previously, an Anti-LGBTQ state attorney general could label any progressive website as bad and ban it for minors. (and because no one know how to age verification, that just means everyone). Now that only happens if Republicans get control of the whitehouse and appoint a activist to head the FTC.
No right is unlimited.
This is why people don’t trust liberals
Because they point out facts? Or do you really think there is an unrestricted right?
but you trust those who say you should have no rights?
They didn’t ban books. That’s just fake news.
humorlessrepost@lemmy.world 6 months ago
They’re not banning you from selling, buying, or reading the book.
They’re creating policies for which books various government institutions can use tax money to buy and make available.
They just happen to be targeting books that recognize the existence of minorities.
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 6 months ago
what’s far scarier is the revisionist history being pushed in many states and school districts.
Today@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Really just pulled from public schools and libraries.
Xatolos@reddthat.com 6 months ago
They are banning you from owning those books.
Pride event canceled because they were going to give away banned books
humorlessrepost@lemmy.world 6 months ago
This is a school district not renting space at the school to a non-profit that intends to distribute the books. That’s a problem, and I expect (and hope) they’ll win their discrimination lawsuit. The same thing happened to the after school Satan club. But framing it as “banning you from owning those books” doesn’t seem honest.