Book Challenges as Political Theatre

Each fall, Banned Books Week reminds us that the right to read is not guaranteed but a  freedom that must be actively defended. At Meriam Library, and in libraries across the country, displays of frequently challenged titles encourage conversations about censorship, intellectual freedom, and equal access to information. This year’s theme from the American Library Association (ALA) “Book Censorship Is So 1984” refers to George Orwell’s dystopian novel that portrays a society where constant surveillance, propaganda, and thought control suppress truth and individual freedom.

 

The scope of contemporary book challenges underscores the relevance of this theme. In 2024, the ALA reported that more than 2,450 titles were challenged nationwide. A challenge is an attempt to restrict or remove materials based on objections from an individual or group, while a ban occurs when materials are removed. Unlike simply voicing an opinion, challenges aim to prevent others from accessing books or resources in classrooms and libraries.

 

According to the ALA, 72% of challenges in 2024 originated from organized pressure groups or government entities, including elected officials, school boards, and administrators. Conservative groups in particular often object to content they believe conflicts with their values, such as strong language, sexual content, depictions of violence, or themes related to gender identity, sexuality, and reproductive rights. They argue such material is inappropriate for younger readers or should be addressed at home rather than in schools or public libraries. Often, one of the reasons cited is illegal obscenity for minors.

 

The First Amendment protects both freedom of speech and the right to access information, which includes the right to read books others might find controversial. Obscenity is not protected under the First Amendment. But the bar for what qualifies as obscene is high, defined by a legal standard known as The Miller Test, established by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1973 case Miller v. California. To be considered obscene, a work must meet all three of these criteria:

1.		The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work appeals to the prurient interest;
2.		The work depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way as defined by state law;
3.		The work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Zach Justus, a professor in communication studies, says, “The Miller Test specifically mentions ‘contemporary community standards’ so the idea that local groups can control what is appropriate is baked into our foundational legal interpretations of the freedom of speech.”

But not liking a book, or even finding it upsetting, isn’t enough to label it obscene. And yet, many of the books targeted in today’s challenges, especially those dealing with gender identity, LGBTQ+ lives, racial history, or sexual violence, are works with clear educational and literary merit. By Miller standards, most would not qualify as obscene.

While governments are prohibited from outright censorship, local boards and communities do exercise discretion in determining which materials appear in public institutions. This discretion, however, can sometimes be used in ways that disproportionately limit access.

A 2024 study in PNAS Nexus analyzing 2,532 bans during the 2021–22 school year found that most challenges targeted children’s books by or about people of color, including works on historical figures. The study also revealed bans were more common in right-leaning counties that had recently become less conservative compared to neighboring areas, suggesting that book bans were often motivated by political strategy rather than concern about reading material.

“Book banning as a concept touches a political nerve because it is associated with the control of information, but in the internet age the inability to read about an idea in book form has very little impact on the distribution of the idea,” Justus says. “Book banning is performative censorship.”

Still, the impact is real. Public libraries face threats of defunding or reduced authority in polarized communities. Academic libraries, long regarded as safe spaces for open inquiry, are increasingly pressured by politically motivated legislation or local controversy, putting civic literacy at risk.

Even when a book is not formally removed, the challenge itself has consequences. Highly publicized challenges can signal to educators and librarians that certain subjects, such as race, gender, or politics, are risky to include. This creates a chilling effect, where materials are avoided not because the law requires it, but out of fear of backlash. Over time, this self-censorship narrows the range of ideas available in schools and libraries, shaping community norms and limiting learning opportunities even without official bans.

Banned Books Week (October 5–11) is a reminder to resist these pressures and engage with diverse voices. Meriam Library will host a display of banned and challenged books on the first floor throughout October and will hold an open-mic Freedom to Read (see more info below) event October 8 from 6 to 7:30 p.m. in the Research Commons.

For more information on book challenges and bans, please visit our Research Subject Guide on banned books.