Right to Read

The “Freedom to Read Act” is the new law just signed by Governor Dan McKee of Rhode Island to codify a buffer against banning books from school and public Libraries. It is not the first of such nationally, but it is claimed to be the strongest. Other states with new right to read laws now in effect include New Jersey, Maryland, Minnesota, California, Illinois, and Washington. So report Publishers Weekly, PEN America, and Rhode Island Current, sources for this article. . The bill had a lot of active supporters, including: Rhode Island community members, Rhode Island Authors Against Book Bans, Rhode Island Library Association, EveryLibrary, Author’s Guild, American Booksellers Association, Association of Rural and Small Libraries, Penguin Random House, and PEN America.

PEN America, in particular, has a singularly dedicated voice in this battle for free speech. It says of itself: “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.”

Penn America says of the new law that it “balances state oversight with local control, aligns with the existing legal standards for obscenity, and requires following best practices without imposing financial penalties on libraries.” It is not unimportant that the “law also establishes vital defenses against criminal prosecution for librarians and school staff curating library collections according to their professional judgement and best practices.” It is not a stretch to foresee that those seeking to ban books might force targets to their financial knees over legal fees and into submission without having to test any law protecting freedom of expression. The tactic has been used on other contested matters.

The success of the effort in Rhode Island counters a storyline that might go as follows. The patron says to the librarian that the collection in the Library, that collection of thousands of books, or a million (as for Westmoreland County as a whole), is biased towards liberal views and should be rebalanced, either by buying books that the patron champions or by weeding out the liberal collection, essentially banning what the patron or her/his organization deems “too liberal.”

Quizzically, the librarian expresses, first of all, surprise to know that the patron has read all the books in the collection, else how to know of the supposed imbalance. The patron must admit of not having read the thousands of books, or a million, but still wants certain “liberal” books removed. The librarian says no to that and asserts professional judgement to serve collection-building. By the new law, the librarian feels empowered to stand firm, knowing the law. With the constitutional right of free speech, there should nominally be no hedging, but with a fresh and specific law on the books and support from all those organizations named above that made it possible, there is no wavering. That is the point.

That is how this works. There may be patron or organizational intimidation, and there is confident pushback, just as there should be. Both sides have used their right of free expression, while obviating any right of intimidation or selfish interest. Public Libraries are being so strengthened. Bravo to all who are making this possible. It is no small thing in our precious Democracy, the torch that inspires the world.