Arkansas Act 372

Last updated

Arkansas Act 372 was signed by the Arkansas governor on March 31 and is scheduled to go into effect in August 2023. [1] Sections one and five of Arkansas Act 372 expose librarians and booksellers to criminal penalties, [2] which includes up to a year in prison, in the case they distribute materials such as books, magazines, and movies deemed "harmful to minors." [1]

Contents

The Act

The primary purpose of Act 372 is to permit books in public libraries to be banned or transferred. It states that anybody may "challenge the appropriateness" of a book, although it does not specify what "obscene" or "appropriateness" means. According to the law, a panel of persons appointed by head librarians would assess disputed material and cast votes in a public hearing on whether it should be maintained on access to the public or transferred to a section of the library unavailable to individuals below the age of 18. [3] Act 372 also permits librarians and booksellers to face up to a year in prison if they allow children to have access to banned books. [4]

Reactions

On 2 June 2023, a coalition of Arkansas librarians, booksellers, and customers launched a lawsuit challenging the lawsuit. The complaint was brought by Democracy Forward, a nonprofit legal advocacy organization, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas on behalf of the defendants, which also comprises the Arkansas Library Association and the Central Arkansas Library System. [1] The lawsuit has challenged the legality of two out of six chapters included in Act 372. The group of plaintiffs includes the public libraries in Eureka Springs and Fayetteville, Central Arkansas Library System, trade associations and two bookstores [5] In July 2023, U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks granted plaintiffs’ request to temporary enjoin two of the five sections of Act 372, saying that parts of the law arts violate freedoms under First Amendment. Brooks’ decision means much of Act 372 will not go into effect as originally scheduled. [6]

Supporters of the new rule argue the legislation would safeguard children from "indoctrination" and concerns regarding the teaching of race and racism in US history, sexual preference, and gender identity as well. [7]

Related Research Articles

In law, standing or locus standi is a condition that a party seeking a legal remedy must show they have, by demonstrating to the court, sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case. A party has standing in the following situations:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Comstock Act of 1873</span> United States anti-obscenity law

The Comstock Actof 1873 refers to a series of current provisions in Federal law that generally criminalize the involvement of the United States Postal Service, its officers, or a common carrier in conveying obscene matter, crime-inciting matter, or certain abortion-related matter. The Comstock Act is largely codified across title 18 of the United States Code and was enacted beginning in 1872 with the attachment of an extraneous rider to a postal service reconsolidation bill. Amended multiple times since initial enactment, with most recently in 1996, the Act is nonetheless often associated with U.S. Postal Inspector and anti-vice activist Anthony Comstock.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pornography laws by region</span> Legality of pornography

Pornography laws by region vary throughout the world. The production and distribution of pornographic films are both activities that are legal in some but not all countries, as long as the pornography features performers above a certain age, usually 18 years. Further restrictions are often placed on such material.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">PROTECT Act of 2003</span> United States law regarding child abuse and violent crimes against children

The PROTECT Act of 2003 is a United States law with the stated intent of preventing child abuse as well as investigating and prosecuting violent crimes against children. "PROTECT" is a backronym which stands for "Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to End the Exploitation of Children Today".

<i>King & King</i> 2000 picture book by Stern Nijland and Linda De Haan

King & King is a children's picture book co-authored and co-illustrated by Stern Nijland and Linda De Haan. King & King tells the story of a young prince whose mother is forcing him to find his princess. However, after meeting many princesses, the prince falls in love with another prince. King & King was originally written in Frisian and has since been published in ten languages. The book's illustrations have received both positive and negative reviews, as has the storyline. The book has been analyzed for both its usefulness in the classroom and its challenges to social norms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Susan Illston</span> American judge (born 1948)

Susan Yvonne Illston is a senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. She was nominated by President Bill Clinton and confirmed by the Senate in 1995. She assumed senior status in 2013.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyfraud</span> False copyright claims to public-domain content

A copyfraud is a false copyright claim by an individual or institution with respect to content that is in the public domain. Such claims are unlawful, at least under US and Australian copyright law, because material that is not copyrighted is free for all to use, modify and reproduce. Copyfraud also includes overreaching claims by publishers, museums and others, as where a legitimate copyright owner knowingly, or with constructive knowledge, claims rights beyond what the law allows.

The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), previously known as Morality in Media and Operation Yorkville, is an American conservative anti-pornography organization. The group has also campaigned against sex trafficking, same-sex marriage, sex shops and sex toys, decriminalization of sex work, comprehensive sex education, and various works of literature or visual arts the organization has deemed obscene, profane or indecent. Its current president is Patrick A. Trueman. The organization describes its goal as "exposing the links between all forms of sexual exploitation".

Internet censorship in the United States is the suppression of information published or viewed on the Internet in the United States. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects freedom of speech and expression against federal, state, and local government censorship.

The copyright law of the United States grants monopoly protection for "original works of authorship". With the stated purpose to promote art and culture, copyright law assigns a set of exclusive rights to authors: to make and sell copies of their works, to create derivative works, and to perform or display their works publicly. These exclusive rights are subject to a time and generally expire 70 years after the author's death or 95 years after publication. In the United States, works published before January 1, 1929, are in the public domain.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Child pornography laws in the United States</span>

In the United States, child pornography is illegal under federal law and in all states and is punishable by up to life imprisonment and fines of up to $250,000. U.S. laws regarding child pornography are virtually always enforced and amongst the harshest in the world. The Supreme Court of the United States has found child pornography to be outside the protections of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Federal sentencing guidelines on child pornography differentiate between production, distribution, and purchasing/receiving, and also include variations in severity based on the age of the child involved in the materials, with significant increases in penalties when the offense involves a prepubescent child or a child under the age of 18. U.S. law distinguishes between pornographic images of an actual minor, realistic images that are not of an actual minor, and non-realistic images such as drawings. The latter two categories are legally protected unless found to be obscene, whereas the first does not require a finding of obscenity.

American Booksellers for Free Expression (ABFE) is a non-profit organization operating as the advocacy wing of the American Booksellers Association (ABA) to promote free speech and expression in the United States. The organization was founded in 1990 as the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression (ABFFE). In 2015, the ABFFE merged with the ABA and became ABFE. The organization works at both the national level and at local levels to support individuals who voice opposition to book challenges and bans. ABFE also provides resources and education to booksellers, politicians, the press, and the public on the importance of free expression.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Center for Reproductive Rights</span> American non-profit organization

The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) is a global legal advocacy organization, headquartered in New York City, that seeks to advance reproductive rights, such as abortion. The organization's stated mission is to "use the law to advance reproductive freedom as a fundamental human right that all governments are legally obligated to protect, respect, and fulfill." Founded by Janet Benshoof in 1992, its original name was the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy.

Smith v. California, 361 U.S. 147 (1959), was a U.S. Supreme Court case upholding the freedom of the press. The decision deemed unconstitutional a city ordinance that made one in possession of obscene books criminally liable because it did not require proof that one had knowledge of the book's content, and thus violated the freedom of the press guaranteed in the First Amendment. Smith v. California continued the Supreme Court precedent of ruling that questions of freedom of expression were protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from invasion by state action. It also established that in order for one to be criminally liable for possession of obscene material, there must be proof of one's knowledge of the material. It described that by requiring booksellers to know the contents of all of the books that they sell, this would lead to the government compelling booksellers to self-censor thereby restricting the public's access to books which the State could not constitutionally suppress directly.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Book censorship in Canada</span>

Book Censorship in Canada is primarily limited to the control of which books may be imported. Canada Border Services Agency is able to block materials considered to be inappropriate from entering the country, although this practice has become less frequent since the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was put into place.

Book censorship is the removal, suppression, or restricted circulation of literary, artistic, or educational material on the grounds that it is objectionable according to the standards applied by the censor. The first instance of book censorship in what is now known as the United States, took place in 1637 in modern-day Quincy, Massachusetts. While specific titles caused bouts of book censorship, with Uncle Tom’s Cabin frequently cited as the first book subject to a national ban, censorship of reading materials and their distribution remained sporadic in the United States until the Comstock Laws in 1873. It was in the early 20th century that book censorship became a more common practice and source of public debate. Throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries there have been waves of attempts at widespread book censorship in the US. Since 2022, the country has seen a dramatic increase of attempted and successful censorship, with a 63% rise in reported cases between 2022 and 2023, including a substantial rise in challenges filed to hundreds of books at a time. In recent years, about three-fourths of books subject to censorship in the US are for children, pre-teenagers, and teenagers.

<i>Florence v. Shurtleff</i>

Florence v. Shurtleff, Civil No. 2:05CV000485, was a case in which the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah issued an order stating that individuals could not be prosecuted for posting adult content that was constitutionally protected on general access websites, nor could they be civilly liable for failing to prevent access to adult content, so long as the material is identifiable by filtering software. The order was the result of a 2005 lawsuit, The King's English v. Shurtleff, brought by Utah bookstores, artists, Internet Service Providers and the other organizations challenging the constitutionality of certain portions of a Utah law intended to protect minors from adult content.

Democracy Forward Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit and non-partisan legal services and public policy research organization in Washington, D.C. Founded in 2017, the organization works to expose and litigate corruption in the Executive Branch of the United States government.

Starting in 2021, there have been a considerable number of books banned or challenged in parts of the United States. Most of the targeted books have to do with race, gender, and sexuality. Unlike most book challenges in the past, whereby parents or other stakeholders in the community would engage teachers and school administrators in a debate over a title, local groups have received support from conservative advocacy organizations working to nationalize the efforts focused on certain subjects. They have also been more likely to involve legal and legislative measures rather than just conversations in local communities. Journalists, academics, librarians, and others commonly link the coordinated, often well-funded book challenges to other reactionary efforts to restrict what students should learn about systemic bias and the history of the United States. Hundreds of books have been challenged, including high-profile examples like Maus by Art Spiegelman and New Kid by Jerry Craft.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Amanda Jones (librarian)</span> American librarian and activist

Amanda Jones is an American librarian and anti-censorship advocate. Jones has been heavily involved in anti-book banning movements in the state of Louisiana and throughout the US. In 2023, she was awarded the American Association of School Librarians' Intellectual Freedom Award and the American Library Association's Paul Howard Award for Courage, which honors "an individual who has exhibited unusual courage for the benefit of library programs or services." In 2022, Jones received national news coverage after filing a defamation and harassment lawsuit against a conservative political group, Citizens for a New Louisiana, its leader Michael Lunsford, as well as Ryan Thames, who operates the Facebook page "Bayou State of Mind".

References

  1. 1 2 3 O'Connell-Domenech, Alejandra (2023-06-02). "Arkansas librarians, booksellers file lawsuit against latest book ban law". The Hill. Retrieved 2023-06-03.
  2. https://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/Home/FTPDocument?path=%2FACTS%2F2023R%2FPublic%2FACT372.pdf
  3. Shaffi, Sarah (31 May 2023). "Librarians sue Arkansas state over a law banning them from giving 'obscene' books to children". The Guardian.
  4. Coop, Griffin (2 June 2023). "New York Times, NBC, Guardian take note of Arkansas library lawsuit". Arkansas Times. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
  5. https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2023/jul/30/enforcement-of-two-parts-of-new-arkansas-law-on/%22Attorneys+for+coalition+of+libraries,+booksellers+seek+judicial+hold+on+parts+of+new+Arkansas+law+on+library+materials%22.+Arkansas+Online.+2023-06-23.+Retrieved+2023-06-25.
  6. https://arkansasadvocate.com/2023/07/29/federal-judge-temporarily-blocks-two-sections-of-arkansas-library-obscenity-law/#:~:text=U.S.%20District%20Judge%20Timothy%20Brooks,or%20%E2%80%9Charmful%20to%20minors.%E2%80%9D
  7. Salam, Erum (2 June 2023). "Group suing Arkansas says book ban law seeks to 'criminalize librarians'". The Guardian. Retrieved 8 June 2023.