Trump administration could change the way we read, from book bans to author talks
Trump administration could change the way we read, from book bans to author talks
Show Caption
Hide Caption
US schools banned 10,000 books last school year alone
It's Banned Books Week in the U.S. and it comes as we're learning more than 10,000 books were banned in public schools nationwide last year.
Straight Arrow News
Despite the international buzz over her latest romance novel "Deep End," author Ali Hazelwood told fans she had to cancel her U.K. book tour.
In a social media post, the bestselling romance author who was born in Italy cited border concerns with leaving and reentering the U.S., mirroring concerns from tourists, noncitizens and visa and green card holders about the Trump administration's recent deportation and border actions.
Hazelwood's tour snag sparked a discussion on book communities about how President Donald Trump's recent policies would trickle down to publishing. Amid book banning, border policies, new anti-DEI sentiments and federal library grant cuts, these are the ways the new administration may impact readers.
Trump administration's policies shake author tour plans
Hazelwood, who is originally from Italy and now resides in the U.S., was booked for several international appearances before she canceled because "it's not possible for me to safely travel outside and then back inside the US," she wrote on Instagram.
But Curtis Chin, the Detroit-based author of "Everything I Learned, I Learned in a Chinese Restaurant," decided to move his tour abroad after several U.S. colleges canceled book talks with him, citing funding cuts from federal arts grants.
"Asian American Heritage Month is May, right? So I'm usually booked giving speeches," he says, but not this year.
Around the same time, the John Adams Institute in Amsterdam invited him to talk about his book and being a writer of color in the U.S. during the Trump administration. Then, he got booked at Oxford University and the British Library. Soon, he had 21 events abroad in just one month.
"Maybe in America we're not ready to talk about these things, but maybe there are other places," Chin says.
Still, it comes with a steep financial loss for Chin. He's losing two months of income because his European stops are unpaid opportunities. With U.S. events, he often makes thousands of dollars per event, occasionally up to $10,000.
Authors worry about impact of Trump, DEI backslide
In Chin's mind, it's not a coincidence that May was the first AAPI Month he wasn't fully booked with speaking engagements. He also worried about June's Pride Month, another typically busy month for him. His shift to international engagements, he says, feels reminiscent of historical movements of artists of color to Europe to evade discrimination, like James Baldwin and Josephine Baker.
"In some small way, I'm in that same tradition where the things that we're writing, the things that we're creating are facing these extraordinary scrutiny and challenges," Chin says.
Trump has not issued a proclamation for Pride Month, instead starting June with several actions undermining gains for LGBTQ+ Americans.
And though Trump did formally recognize AAPI Month as past presidents have, his efforts to purge DEI practices led major companies like Disney, IBM and Goldman Sachs to publicly scrap DEI initiatives. The majority of organizations have "simply gone quiet" on DEI, according to past reporting from USA TODAY. And in early May, Trump fired longtime Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden, the first Black American and first woman to head the library, because of her "pursuit of DEI." Hayden had been leading the "Of the People" initiative to bring more works from Black, Indigenous, Hispanic or Latino, Asian American and Pacific Islander and other communities of color into the library's collections.
Books typically take between two and three years to publish. If publishers follow in the suit of major companies turning away from – or staying silent – on DEI, we may not see the effect until years down the line.
"It actually occurred to me, maybe I should hold off and wait until Trump is out of office before I try to sell my book because I don't know if publishers are afraid of publishing books by people of color. Because maybe there's a perception that these books may be banned, these books may not be bought by libraries," Chin says. "But then I thought to myself, I can't be afraid."
Grant cuts threaten libraries, public spaces for readers
In March, Trump issued an executive order that terminated dozens of federal grants held by libraries, archives and museums. The Institute of Museum and Library Services, one of those agencies, distributes millions of dollars in congressionally approved funds to libraries across the country. A federal judge has since blocked the Trump administration, but uncertainty about the state of funding means some libraries have already abandoned programs and implemented hiring freezes.
The administration's termination of grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities and the National Endowment for the Arts also impacts authors and academics. Michigan Humanities, the state affiliate of NEH, was left with a $900,000 budget loss after the cuts, according to the Detroit Free Press. One shuttered program is Great Michigan Read, which "engages 300 organizations in all 83 counties," according to the organization's president and CEO.
This year, Chin was the recipient of the annual grant, which would normally buy around 6,000 copies of Chin's book and send him on a 15-city tour of the state. Then he got word that the program could not proceed because of the funding cuts.
The rollback is particularly devastating to Chin because, growing up in Detroit and Ann Arbor, he didn't see himself represented in the books in his classrooms and libraries.
"That's why we write, because we want to be seen and we want to help other people navigate their lives, right?" Chin says. "They're denying us an audience because they don't like what we have to say. They don't like our vision of the country. But, I would argue that our vision of the country is a loving vision of America. It's an open, embracing vision of America."
The publishing world's most influential voices are also speaking out. Before the judge blocked Trump's executive order to eliminate IMLS funding, four of the Big Five publishers – Hachette, Macmillan, Penguin Random House and Simon & Schuster – as well as Sourcebooks, called on Congress to reject the order. And at this year's PEN America Literary Gala, actress and SPJ Lit imprint founder Sarah Jessica Parker said she was "enraged" at threats to libraries and librarians across the country.
"To censor books is to limit imagination, curiosity, connection, empathy and inspiration. Libraries aren't just buildings with shelves, they are a beacon," Parker said. "They are warm in the winter and cool in summer, and they are sanctuaries of possibility. They are the heartbeat of a neighborhood."
Book banning continues in libraries, classrooms
A late March order by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth led to 400 books being removed from the U.S. Naval Academy's library to "comply with directives outlined in executive orders issued by the president," according to a statement from a Navy spokesperson reported by The New York Times. Most of the banned titles – a ban is any restriction on access, according to the American Library Association – discuss race, gender or sexuality. Books embraced by white supremacists, like "Mein Kampf," "The Camp of Saints" and "The Bell Curve" remained on the shelves.
One ongoing Supreme Court case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, appears likely to rule that parents can opt their children out of classroom books that include representations of gender and sexuality that go against their religion. The Trump administration agrees with the parents.
PEN America has filed an amicus brief in support of Thomas W. Taylor, the respondent in the case representing Montgomery County Public Schools. In a press release, the organization warned a ruling in favor of the parents could "turbocharge the already dire state of book bans and educational censorship."
"An opt-out would chill freedom of speech for students, teachers and authors and would constitute viewpoint discrimination, raising core First Amendment concerns," PEN America's Chief Legal Officer Eileen Hershenov said in the release. "Both legally and practically, this would deny students access to diverse literature that spurs empathy, understanding and prepares them for lives in a pluralistic society."
Clare Mulroy is USA TODAY's Books Reporter, where she covers buzzy releases, chats with authors and dives into the culture of reading. Find her on Instagram, subscribe to our weekly Books newsletter or tell her what you're reading at cmulroy@usatoday.com.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
19 minutes ago
- CNBC
Investing in Space: Iron Dome's performance could be Golden Dome's opportunity
Israel and Iran resumed fire exchanges at the end of last week, and space and defense enthusiasts have been following the fusillades. Front and center has been the use of drones in this new leg of the conflict and the health of Israel's infamous Iron Dome missile defense system, as it fought off a barrage of drones and missiles. There's an inevitable connection: the Iron Dome's currently doing the job in Israel that U.S. President Donald Trump wants to get done at home through the proposed Golden Dome multi-layered missile defense system — a costly $175 billion concept so cutting edge that lawmakers and analysts have often questioned its viability. On one hand, you have the Congressional Budget Office warning that the project could cost as much as $542 billion. On the other, space and defense companies are chomping at the bit to fast-track Trump's ambitions from executively ordered vision to satellite-touting reality before the 2029 end of his term. "The performance of Israel's multi-tiered missile defense system underscores the urgent need to strengthen U.S. missile defenses. Thus far, Israeli missile defense inventories have kept up with the Iranian threat — buying decisionmakers valuable time to not just defend the goal but to score some," Patrycja Bazylczyk, research associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies' Missile Defense Project, told CNBC by email. "U.S. policymakers should view this as a nod towards the importance of building inventories well before the fight, in the event of a missile attack from either Russia or China, we will be facing far more complex, and numerous salvos," she added. Like a Hollywood revenant, Golden Dome rose from the ashes of Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative — nicknamed "Star Wars" — that died a long death to a string of arguments over tech obstacles, steep price tags and the potential to kick off a new arms race with the Soviet Union. Unsurprisingly, Russia and China have been the starkest foreign detractors of Golden Dome, which sets out to defend the vast spread of the U.S. homeland from ballistic, hypersonic and cruise missiles through a web of satellites, sensors and interceptors. The timing isn't ideal — both superpowers doth protest too much at a point when the major arms control deal between Washington and Moscow, the New START treaty, is set to lapse next year without a successor, while U.S. talks on a similar topic with Beijing were suspended in 2024. Within the industry, Golden Dome looks like a mighty fine bone thrown to private space companies faced with severe budget cuts at key U.S. space contractor NASA. For the past few months, defense and space businesses have been vying for a slice of the project's pie, especially after Elon Musk's recent public feud with Trump left SpaceX's potential role in the scheme under question. Take a look at the Paris Air Show — a sprawling affair enveloping Le Bourget Airport in the northeast of the French capital every two years. Around 45% of this year's show is offering a stage to defense and security this year, and the likes of U.S. defense and aerospace manufacturer LockHeed Martin and Boeing used the platform to tout their Golden Dome credentials. "We clearly have a whole number of product lines that will contribute very well, that are going to fit very well with what is necessary to achieve the mission," Lockheed Martin President of Missiles and Fire Control Tim Cahill said, according to Reuters. Golden Dome's progressing, but time will tell if it's here to stay. On June 10, two Republican members of the House of Representatives, Rep. Dale W. Strong (AL-05) and Rep. Jeff Crank (CO-05) announced the formation of a Golden Dome Caucus that will work closely with the Senate's own initiative, in a bid to back Trump's plans. Meanwhile, the House Appropriations Committee unveiled the draft of its fiscal 2026 defense spending bill that features a cool $831.5 billion top spend line — and a $13 billion allocation for "missile defense and space programs to augment and integrate in support of the Golden Dome effort." That's a respective $8.8 billion and $4.1 billion for missile defense and space programs backing the project, in the fine print. Don't worry, there's a deal to be had: Trump's reassured Canada it can skip a newly upped $71 billion fee to enjoy Golden Dome's benefits — if it just becomes part of the United States. Even better, Washington could end up a trendsetter across the Atlantic. "I don't know about the Golden Dome in the U.S. and so forth, but I do believe that we have to create an integrated … missile defense system, also in the European perspective, and there are initiatives going in that direction," Micael Johansson, CEO of Swedish aerospace and defense company Saab, told CNBC's Charlotte Reed at the Paris Air Show. "We have to have a European setup around that, and we have that capability with all the companies in Europe."

29 minutes ago
Appeals court lets Trump keep control of National Guard troops deployed to Los Angeles
LOS ANGELES -- An appeals court on Thursday allowed President Donald Trump to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids. The decision halts a ruling from a lower court judge who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The deployment was the first by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since 1965. In its decision, a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously concluded it was likely Trump lawfully exercised his authority in federalizing control of the guard. It said that while presidents don't have unfettered power to seize control of a state's guard, the Trump administration had presented enough evidence to show it had a defensible rationale for doing so, citing violent acts by protesters. 'The undisputed facts demonstrate that before the deployment of the National Guard, protesters 'pinned down' several federal officers and threw 'concrete chunks, bottles of liquid, and other objects' at the officers. Protesters also damaged federal buildings and caused the closure of at least one federal building. And a federal van was attacked by protesters who smashed in the van's windows," the court wrote. "The federal government's interest in preventing incidents like these is significant.' It also found that even if the federal government failed to notify the governor of California before federalizing the National Guard as required by law, Newsom had no power to veto the president's order. The California governor's office and the White House didn't immediately respond to emails seeking comment. The court case could have wider implications on the president's power to deploy soldiers within the United States after Trump directed immigration officials to prioritize deportations from other Democratic-run cities. Trump, a Republican, argued that the troops were necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said the move inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The protests have since appeared to be winding down. Two judges on the appeals panel were appointed by Trump during his first term. During oral arguments Tuesday, all three judges suggested that presidents have wide latitude under the federal law at issue and that courts should be reluctant to step in. The case started when Newsom sued to block Trump's command, and he won an early victory from U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco. Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he said only allows presidents can take control during times of 'rebellion or danger of a rebellion.' 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' wrote Breyer, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton and is brother to retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The Trump administration, though, argued that courts can't second guess the president's decisions and quickly secured a temporary halt from the appeals court.

35 minutes ago
Sig Sauer, faced with lawsuits over a popular pistol, gets protection in New Hampshire
CONCORD, N.H. -- Faced with mounting lawsuits over a popular pistol, New Hampshire-based Sig Sauer asked for — and got — protection in the form of a new state law that makes it harder to take the gunmaker to court. Supporters in the Republican-led Legislature said the law was needed to help a major employer. The lawsuits say Sig Sauer's P320 pistol can go off without the trigger being pulled, an allegation the company denies. The law covers all gun manufacturers and federal firearm licensees in product liability claims regarding the 'absence or presence' of four specific safety features. One of those features is an external mechanical safety that people suing Sig Sauer say should be standard on the P320, based on its design. Claims can still be filed over manufacturing defects. Those who have sued Sig Sauer in New Hampshire and elsewhere include police, federal law enforcement officers, and other experienced gun users from multiple states who say they were wounded by the gun. The manufacturer has prevailed in some cases. It is appealing two recent multimillion-dollar verdicts against it, in Pennsylvania and Georgia. George Abrahams a U.S. Army veteran and painting contractor in Philadelphia who won his case, said he had holstered his P320, put it in the pocket of his athletic pants and zipped it up before going downstairs. "All I did was come down the stairway and there was a loud explosion, and then the excruciating pain and bleeding,' he told The Associated Press in 2022. He said the bullet tore through his right thigh. The company, which employs over 2,000 people in a state with permissive gun laws, says the P320 has internal safety mechanisms and 'has undergone the most rigorous testing and evaluation of any firearm, by military and law enforcement agencies around the world." It says the problem is user error or incompatible holsters, not the design. 'Do you want people to be able to sue car manufacturers because they sell cars that don't have air conditioning?' state Rep. Terry Roy, a Republican from Deerfield, told the House during debate in May. Opponents criticized the bill as a special exemption in liability law that has never been granted to any other New Hampshire company. 'I think there is a difference between helping out a large employer and creating an exemption that actually hurts people and doesn't give them their day in court,' state Rep. David Meuse, a Democrat from Portsmouth, said in an interview. His district covers Newington, where Sig Sauer is headquartered. A 2005 federal law gives the gun industry broad legal immunity. New Hampshire was already among 32 states that have adopted gun immunity laws in some form, according to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Some states also have repealed gun industry immunity statutes or weakened them. A Sig Sauer executive asked New Hampshire lawmakers for help in April, two weeks after a Pennsylvania-based law firm filed its most recent lawsuit in federal court in Concord on March 26 over the design of the P320. The firm represents over 100 people who have filed such lawsuits, including more than 70 in New Hampshire. 'We're fighting all these court cases out of town and every single court case we have to fight takes away money from Granite State residents and workers that we can employ and technology,' testified Bobby Cox, vice president of governmental affairs for the company. The measure took effect once Republican Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed it on May 23. Legislators said it doesn't apply to the current lawsuits. However, lawyers for Sig Sauer mentioned it as part of their argument to dismiss the March case or break up and transfer the claims of 22 plaintiffs to court districts where they live. A hearing on the matter is set for July 21. Ayotte's office did not respond to an AP request seeking comment, but it told The Keene Sentinel that she's 'proud to protect New Hampshire companies that create thousands of good-paying jobs from frivolous lawsuits.' 'Out-of-state trial lawyers looking to make money will not find a venue in New Hampshire,' Ayotte's office said in an emailed statement to the newspaper. Robert Zimmerman, the plaintiffs' lead attorney in Pennsylvania, said the goal of the lawsuits is to get the weapon's design changed so that it's safe for the people who use it. New Hampshire was the chosen location because federal rules allow lawsuits against a company in its home state, Zimmerman said. Those lawsuits have been assigned to one federal judge in Concord. 'Sig is trying to strategically decentralize this case and make every client go to 100 different courthouses and slow down the process for both sides to get a just outcome, which is a trial that is decided on the merits,' Zimmerman said in an interview. The lawsuits accuse Sig Sauer of defective product design and marketing and negligence. During the House debate, Roy said he owns a P320 and it's one of his favorite guns, 'but you can buy them with or without safeties.' The plaintiffs say 'the vast majority' of P320 models sold don't come with the safety, 'even as an option.' Sig Sauer says some users prefer the faster draw time granted by the absence of an external safety; others want the feature for added security. Sig Sauer offered a 'voluntary upgrade' in 2017 to include an alternate design that reduces the weight of the trigger, among other features. The plaintiffs' lawyers say the upgrade did not stop unintentional discharges. 'It's not a great look' when a manufacturer can carve out a statutory exemption for itself, but it's also not unusual, said Daniel Pi, an assistant professor at the University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law. In Tennessee, Gov. Bill Lee signed a bill in 2023 following a deadly school shooting that gives gun and ammunition dealers, manufacturers and sellers additional protections against lawsuits. This year, Tennessee lawmakers passed another bill to further limit liability for gun companies. In a different industry — pesticides — governors in North Dakota and Georgia signed laws this year providing legal protections to Bayer, the maker of Roundup, a popular weed killer. Bayer has been hit with 181,000 claims alleging that the key ingredient in Roundup causes non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Bayer disputes those claims. The Louisiana Legislature passed a bill that would protect nursing homes from most lawsuits and cap damages. Republican Gov. Jeff Landry hasn't acted on it yet.