Report: Texas librarians could be sued for $10,000 under ‘disgusting’ proposed regulations

The last target in the Texas conservatives’ line of fire? Librarians. The lawyers behind the state’s abortion ban are now reportedly gearing up for a similar crackdown on books.

Texas anti-abortion legislation allows individuals to sue those they believe have violated a state ban. Axios reported Thursday that an Austin lawyer who helped develop the historic law, Jonathan Mitchell, has developed city ordinances that could potentially allow people to “[sue] librarians and others for their decisions about which books to put on the shelves or for expressing LGBTQ+ support.”

The news comes as GOP-led states across the country continue to restrict what can be taught in public schools. Many conservative and right-wing groups claim that educators and librarians are trying to indoctrinate children with a liberal ideology, citing books that deal with topics such as race, gender, and sexuality as evidence.

As of September last year, Mitchell allegedly wrote Safe Library Visitor Protection projects for 10 communities in Texas — and according to the data, 10 more are in the works. Axios. It is not clear which communities have considered this issue.

Like abortion law, the book-related rulings apparently mean that violators can be sued for at least $10,000, plus attorneys’ fees and court costs. The report also states that a civil lawsuit could be filed against the library if employees do not pick up controversial titles from the shelves.

Librarians, of course, are not thrilled with this idea.

Shirley Robinson, executive director of the Texas Library Association, called the ordinances “incredibly harmful” to both community members and librarians. Processes already exist to allow interested citizens to challenge a book that worries them, she said, making the proposal unnecessary and “over the top.”

Regardless of whether the draft regulations are passed, Robinson said the deterrent effect has already begun to take hold in the state. Librarians are leaving the profession and soft censorship is on the rise, meaning staff may refrain from completing certain collections or may remove titles before they are challenged.

“They are afraid for their jobs. They are afraid for their employees,” she said. “We know that librarians are subject to bullying and harassment on social media, especially in the smaller communities targeted by members of these groups.”

She added that some libraries have also set up armed guards during advisory board meetings and protests are breaking out on the ground.

“So it has a terrible effect on the profession. These are the librarians who are being hunted,” Robinson said. “I can’t imagine that we would ever even consider saying those words five years ago.”

Mitchell didn’t answer Observerrequests for comments by the time of publication.

We just don’t have any more words. – Deborah Caldwell-Stone, American Library Association.

tweet it

Regardless of political views, Robinson does not see the proposed regulations as realistic. They include deliberate “vague language” to create confusion, and now people not trained in librarianship may be tasked with selecting books for a narrow majority of the community based on their personal biases and beliefs, she said.

She added that the ordinances are also likely to lead to bureaucracy and additional costs to the library’s already tight budget.

According to a 2022 report by free speech literary group PEN America, the Lone Star State leads the nation in the number of banned books. Nearly two dozen Texas school districts are mentioned in the report, and Granbury’s ISD tops the list with roughly 130 bans.

Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the American Library Association’s Office of Intellectual Freedom, called the draft regulation “disgusting.”

Librarians already want to work with parents to find books that fit their family’s needs and values, she says. But this would effectively allow the active minority to restrict access to information in publicly funded libraries.

A report from the ALA initiative, Unite Against Book Bans, notes that in 2021, students were only involved in 1% of book problems. 7 out of 10 say the same when it comes to public libraries.

Caldwell-Stone, who is also executive director of the ALA’s Reading Freedom Foundation, stressed that libraries offer much more than books, including Internet access and other resources. And, in her opinion, local ordinances are designed to circumvent state laws and constitutional review in court.

People who are concerned about certain books have the right to ask the library not to let their children read them, she said. However, this does not mean that they should “deny everyone else in the community access to it.”

“We really need to think: is this the definition of democracy and freedom, or is this the definition of an authoritarian state?” she added.

Caldwell-Stone fears that ultimately taxpayers may be the ones forced to shell out $10,000 in such potential lawsuits at the expense of other public services. She is concerned about the idea that people could potentially receive financial rewards for using the right to veto criticism.

“[It] it is simply incomprehensible that this is a priority for individuals, ”she said. “And the idea that you want to punish and attack public servants for serving the public good is just astounding too – we just have no more words.”