UPDATE: Lambda Legal joins NCAC in an effort to oppose the removal of books from Rancocas Valley Regional High School, sending an additional letter to the School Board that specifically addresses public schools’ interests and obligations to protect LGBT students’ safety and wellbeing.
NCAC sent another letter to the school board to address an issue that has recently arisen in similar situations: the widespread misunderstanding about the application of “contemporary community standards” for selecting or removing materials in public schools.
NCAC, along with members of the Coalition, sent a letter to the Rancocas Valley School Board in Mt. Holly, NJ, regarding the recent challenge to books in its library. A small group of residents oppose the books because they appear on a list of gay and lesbian-themed books created by the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN).
April 8, 2010
Michael D. Moskalski, D.Ed., Superintendent/Principal
Members of the School Board
Rancocas Valley Regional High School
520 Jacksonville Road
Mt. Holly, NJ 08060
Dear Dr. Moskalski and Members of the Rancocas Valley School Board,
The undersigned organizations write to express concern about the challenge to several books in the Rancocas Valley Regional High School Media Center collection.
The challenge has been brought by a small organized group of residents who oppose three books in the library because they appear on a list of gay and lesbian-themed books created by the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN). Without questioning the sincerity of those who object to these book, their views are not shared by all, and they have no right to impose their views on others or to demand that the contents of the library reflect their personal, religious, or moral values.
No parent has the right “to tell a public school what his or her child will and will not be taught.” Leebaert v. Harrington, 332 F.3d 134, 141 (2d Cir. 2003). Nor do parents have “a fundamental right generally to direct how a public school teaches their child.” Blau v. Fort Thomas Public School District, et al, 401 F.3d 381, 395 (6th Cir. 2005). “[T]he mere fact that a child is exposed on occasion in public school to a concept offensive to a parent’s religious belief does not inhibit the parent from instructing the child differently. A parent whose ‘child is exposed to sensitive topics or information at school remains free to discuss these matters and to place them in the family’s moral or religious context, or to supplement the information with more appropriate materials.’” Parker v. Hurley, 514 F. 3d 87, 105 (1st Cir. 2008) (citation omitted).
These principles apply with special force in the library. Schools "may not remove books from library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books…. " Board of Education v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 872 (1982). In that case, the Supreme Court rejected the claim that library selections should transmit "community values." Unlike "the compulsory environment of the classroom," in the library, the "regime of voluntary inquiry" controls. 457 U.S. at 869.
No one has to read something just because it’s on the library shelf. No book is right for everyone, and the role of the library is to allow students to make choices according to their own interests, experiences, and family values. Some parents prefer to keep their children from reading about sex; others may strongly disapprove of teen sexual activity and still not censor their children’s reading. Some parents appreciate books that delve into the subject of sexual orientation, because they can create opportunities for adults and teens to talk about the topic. Even if the books are too mature for some students, they will be meaningful to others.
The attempt "to eliminate everything that is objectionable…will leave public schools in shreds. Nothing but educational confusion and a discrediting of the public school system can result…." McCollum v. Board of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 235 (1948) (Jackson, J. concurring). In practice, acceding to the demands to remove one kind of book invariably invites multiple, sometimes conflicting demands on school officials to exclude other material that other parents find objectionable. To avoid such difficulties, and to provide students with the breadth of information and skills necessary to succeed in a diverse society, educators are well-advised to defend the rights of students to access the broadest range of knowledge. School officials have much wider discretion to include material that has pedagogical value than to exclude it, and their decisions to do so have rarely, if ever, been rejected in the courts. See Monteiro v. Tempe Union High School District (9th Cir. 1998).
The task of selecting school materials properly belongs to professional librarians and educators. Parents may be equipped to make choices for their own children, but, no matter how well-intentioned, they simply are not equipped to make decisions for others.
The First Amendment protects the rights of each of us to make our own decisions about what to read and think. The Constitution and intellectual freedom demand no less.
Sincerely,
Joan Bertin, Executive Director, National Coalition Against Censorship.
Millie Davis, Division Director, Communications and Affiliate Services, National Council of Teachers of English
Chris Finan, President, American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression
Michael B. Keegan, President, People For the American Way Foundation
Judith Platt, Director, Freedom to Read and Communications/Public Affairs, Association of American Publishers
Larry Siems, Director, Freedom to Write and International Programs, PEN American Center
Dear Dr. Moskalski and Members of the Rancocas Valley School Board,
We write to follow up on our earlier letter about the challenge to three books on gay and lesbian themes in the Rancocas Valley High School library and to address an issue that has recently arisen in similar situations: the widespread misunderstanding about the application of “contemporary community standards” for selecting or removing materials in public schools.
“Contemporary community standards” are relevant to First Amendment analysis only in the context of obscenity law. The test to determine whether something is legally obscene is:
(a) whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. Miller v. California, 423 U.S. 15, 24 (1973).
Thus, community standards apply only to the determination of whether material “appeals to the prurient interest.” In contrast, the test of whether material has “serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value,” is “not judged by contemporary community standards.” Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 873 (1997). Instead, the Miller test set “as a matter of law, a national floor for socially redeeming value.” Id.
There is no question that these books are not obscene. Whatever members of the community may think about them, the books have socially redeeming value because they inform the reader about the experience of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and questioning (GLBTQ) youth. Indeed, two of these books are collections of contributions by teens and young adults reflecting on their own real life experiences.
The books have also received critical acclaim. Booklist, published by the American Library Association, observes that the contributions to Revolutionary Voices “embrace a queer youth culture that is about gender, race, and class as much as it is about sexuality …. What holds these selections together is the writers’ urgent need to define themselves in their own terms.”
Booklist calls The Full Spectrum “ insightful, extraordinarily well written, and emotionally mature….” School Library Journal says “the collection is comprehensive, complex, and the perfect title to put into the hands of teens who approach the information desk asking for real stories about coming out and coming to terms with anything remotely GLBTQ.” In Love & Sex, according to Publishers Weekly, “the editor strives for a more honest, complex rendering of adolescent ‘life as it is lived.’”
These and other assessments demonstrate the “socially redeeming value” these books have for GLBTQ students, as well as straight students who are interested in learning about the experiences of students addressing issues of sexual orientation and identity. In setting public health policy, the U.S. Government notes that “[p]eople who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) are members of every community. They are diverse, come from all walks of life, and include people of all races and ethnicities….” There are undoubtedly GLBTQ students at Rancocas Valley High School, regardless of whether they are openly recognized. Removing any of these titles would send a clear message to those students that they are the objects of social disapproval – different, vulnerable, and marginal – whose needs for information of particular relevance to their lives are not respected.
We appreciate the discomfort some parents may experience with such material and respect their right to their views. They are entitled to express those views and enforce them with their own children. But that does not mean that their views should prevail when acceding to them would undermine the education and well-being of others. Public schools serve the interests of all students, including GLBTQ students.
Please feel free to call if you have any questions, or if we can provide additional information.
Sincerely,
Joan Bertin, Executive Director, National Coalition Against Censorship
Millie Davis, Division Director, Communications and Affiliate Services, National Council of Teachers of English
Chris Finan, President, American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression
Michael B. Keegan, President, People For the American Way Foundation
Judith Platt, Director, Freedom to Read and Communications/Public Affairs, Association of American Publishers
Larry Siems, Director, Freedom to Write and International Programs, PEN American Center
*image by Moriza