Texas Moves to Punish Bookstores That Sell 'Obscene' Books
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A bill has been introduced to the Texas Legislature that could result in bookstores facing fines and legal costs if they place material deemed "obscene" within access of a minor.
House Bill 1375 was proposed by state Representative Nate Schatzline, a Republican, who said it is needed to keep "harmful material" away from children. Critics argue it would force bookshops to self-sensor or risk potentially devastating lawsuits.
Newsweek contacted Schatzline for comment via email on Friday.
Why It Matters
In recent years, a number of Republican-controlled states have passed laws banning school libraries from holding certain books that they regard as inappropriate.
The Texas Legislature in 2023 passed a bill forbidding school libraries from having any book among its stacks that "describes or portrays sexual conduct" in a "patently offensive way" that are not required by the curriculum.
PEN America recorded 3,362 instances of what it classified as book bans across the U.S. in the 2022-23 academic year, a 33 percent rise from the previous year.
What To Know
House Bill 1375 would make commercial enterprises, such as bookstores, liable for "damages arising from the distribution, transmission, or display of harmful material to a minor."
This would include when such material is "readily accessible to minors" or "includes a minor's visual image, audio voice, or participation in any manner."
Any business found to have broken this law could have to pay damages and would be liable for associated court costs and legal fees.
A book is pulled out on a shelf at a Barnes & Noble on January 11, 2024, in Austin, Texas.
A book is pulled out on a shelf at a Barnes & Noble on January 11, 2024, in Austin, Texas.
Brandon Bell/GETTY
The legislation also specifies that a business could face multiple lawsuits over the same piece of material deemed obscene if more than one person decides to launch a case. Such material could be reported by either minors or their parents/guardians.
The bill does contain protections for media organizations including newspapers, magazines and TV stations.
What People Are Saying
Speaking to local television network KTBS, Schatzline said: "This bill also holds commercial entities accountable if they are knowingly distributing, transmitting or displaying harmful material to minors in a way that is readily accessible or includes a minor's image, voice and participation.
"If a business is used to engage in an obscenity for the personal benefit of its owner, those people can be held liable."
Charley Rejsek, who runs BookPeople in Austin, Texas, commented: "HB 1375 threatens to no longer allow those young readers in our bookstores and ultimately could cause some bookstores to close their doors."
In a post on X, the Texas Freedom to Read Project, which campaigns against book bans, said: "HB 1375, authored by Representative Schatzline, makes it easier for book banners and other bad actors to raise frivolous claims against local bookshops, big box stores, and online retailers over books they will falsely claim are 'harmful to minors.'
"The increased risk of lawsuits will make it harder for retailers to do business in our local communities and in Texas as a whole. What school district is going to work with a bookseller accused (falsely or not!) of distributing 'harmful materials to minors?'"
Speaking to news outlet Chron, Texas Freedom to Read Project co-founder Anne Russey said: "We've been told by people trying to ban books, 'don't worry, it's not a book ban, you can buy whatever books you want at a private bookstore.
"This bill is potentially making it harder for private booksellers to shelve and offer the kind of books that we've seen banned or challenged in public schools and libraries."
What Happens Next
The Lone Star State's House Bill 1375 awaits a committee appearance. A similar bill failed to pass during the last legislative session. Texas Governor Greg Abbott is a Republican and the GOP has a strong majority in both chambers of the state Legislature.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
14 minutes ago
- New York Post
Man convicted of killing woman abducted from insurance office to be executed in Florida's 10th execution of the year
A man convicted of abducting a woman from a Florida Panhandle insurance office and killing her is scheduled to be executed Tuesday evening. Kayle Bates, 67, is set to receive a lethal injection at 6 p.m. at Florida State Prison near Starke under a death warrant signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis. It would be Florida's 10th death sentence carried out in 2025, further extending the state record for a single year. Two more executions are planned within the next month. Advertisement 3 Kayle Bates, 67, is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection at 6 p.m. at Florida State Prison in Starke, under a death warrant signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis. AP Since the US Supreme Court restored the death penalty in 1976, the highest previous annual total of Florida executions was eight in 2014. Florida has executed more people than any other state this year, while Texas and South Carolina are tied for second place with four each. Advertisement Bates was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping, armed robbery and attempted sexual battery in the June 14, 1982, killing of Janet White in Bay County in the Florida Panhandle. Bates abducted White from the insurance office where she worked, took her into some woods behind the building, attempted to rape her, stabbed her to death and tore a diamond ring from one of her fingers, according to court documents. Attorneys for Bates have filed appeals with the Florida Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court, as well as a federal lawsuit claiming DeSantis' process for signing death warrants was discriminatory. 3 Bates was found guilty of murdering Janet White in Bay County on June 14, 1982, along with charges of kidnapping, armed robbery, and attempted sexual battery. Family Handout Advertisement The federal lawsuit was dismissed last Tuesday, with the judge finding problems with the lawsuit's statistical analysis. The court ruled that even if the numbers were correct, they wouldn't necessarily prove discrimination. On the same day, the Florida Supreme Court denied Bates' pending claims, including arguments that evidence of organic brain damage had been inadequately considered during his second penalty phase. The court ruled that Bates has had three decades to raise these claims. A US Supreme Court decision is still pending on Bates' final appeal. 3 It would be Florida's 10th death sentence carried out in 2025, further extending the state record for a single year. AP Advertisement A total of 28 men have died by court-ordered execution so far this year in the US, and at least 10 other people are scheduled to be put to death in seven states during the remainder of 2025. Curtis Windom, 59, is set to become the 11th person executed in Florida on Aug. 28. He was convicted of killing three people in the Orlando area in 1992. David Pittman, 63, would be the 12th person executed in Florida if his death sentence is carried out as scheduled Sept. 17. He was found guilty of fatally stabbing his estranged wife's sister and parents at their Polk County home before setting it on fire in 1990. Florida executions are carried out using a three-drug lethal injection: a sedative, a paralytic and a drug that stops the heart, according to the state Department of Corrections.
San Francisco Chronicle
14 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Republicans say they'll sue to block California redistricting plan. Do they have a case?
Gov. Gavin Newsom's plan to ask the voters to redesign California's congressional districts to enable Democrats to add House seats is drawing challenges from Republicans who claim the proposal violates the state Constitution and federal law. But the law doesn't appear to be on their side. As the Democratic-controlled Legislature prepares to vote this week on Newsom's proposed November ballot measure to change districts that were drafted by an independent commission, Assembly Member Carl DeMaio, R-San Diego, asked the nonpartisan Legislative Counsel's Office to declare the measure illegal. He said he was also prepared to go to court. 'By concocting this partisan redistricting scam, Gavin Newsom and Democrat politicians are openly violating the California Constitution and their oath of office,' DeMaio said in a news release. 'Any vote … on this corrupt plan would be unlawful and unconstitutional.' He argued that the state Constitution, under a ballot measure approved by the voters in 2008, allows only a bipartisan commission to draw district lines and does not permit them to be redrafted for political purposes. The National Republican Congressional Committee also said Newsom's plan would be challenged in court as well as the ballot box. Newsom 'is shredding California's Constitution and disenfranchising voters to prop up his Presidential ambitions,' Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., chair of the committee, said on X. But Rick Hasen, a professor of law and political science at UCLA who has written widely on election law issues, said the Legislature can ask California voters to change the state Constitution by placing an amendment on the ballot with two-thirds majority votes in each house. Newsom and legislative Democrats introduced their measure on Monday. 'If it's a constitutional amendment approved by voters, then there is no state law problem with amending the earlier constitutional amendment,' Hasen said. Newsom's November ballot measure, a response to plans by Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas to redraw the state's House districts and allow Republicans to pick up five seats next year, would likewise redesign California's congressional districts for the remainder of the decade to enable Democrats to add five seats to their current 43-9 majority in the state if Texas or any other state redrew its district lines. The proposed state constitutional amendment, ACA8, dubbed the Election Rigging Response Act, was introduced Monday with 43 coauthors in the Assembly and 20 in the state Senate, all of them Democrats. They plan legislative votes on Thursday. The ballot proposal would temporarily suspend the state constitutional limits on redistricting that DeMaio cited. But he contended the Legislature has no authority even to ask the voters to remove restrictions they had added to the state Constitution, and that such changes could be made only by an initiative from private citizens. DeMaio said he would actually prefer a U.S. constitutional amendment establishing an independent commission to draw nonpartisan House district lines in every state. Until that happens, he told the Chronicle, Newsom and his fellow Democrats should refrain from asking Californians to 'act like a bunch of toddlers because two wrongs make a right.' Another election law professor, Justin Levitt of Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, who was a national policy adviser for democracy and voting rights under President Joe Biden, said DeMaio was correct that the California Constitution currently prohibits legislators from redrawing district lines. 'But that's exactly why the Legislature is proposing a constitutional amendment,' Levitt said. 'And I'm not aware of any limitation on the Legislature to propose such an amendment for the voters to consider.' DeMaio also said federal law allows changing district lines only after each 10-year census and prohibits mid-decade redistricting. But the Supreme Court ruled otherwise in a 2006 case, League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, allowing Republican legislators in Texas to redraw House district lines in their favor. 'The text and structure of the Constitution and our case law indicate there is nothing inherently suspect about a legislature's decision to replace mid-decade a court-ordered plan with one of its own,' Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for a 7-2 court majority. Texas' current Republican majority, and partisans on both sides in other states, have relied on that ruling to propose off-year redistricting for their own advantage. Levitt said he'd prefer to limit the practice to once per decade. 'I wish there were such a law — and Congress could clearly pass one,' the Loyola law professor said, noting that legislation to prohibit mid-decade redistricting of U.S. House seats has been proposed in Congress for more than 20 years. 'But that's not currently where federal law stands.' Hasen of UCLA said Newsom's proposal might be challenged on other legal grounds, such as the rule limiting California ballot measures to a single subject. But he said opponents' strongest argument would probably be a political one — that the voters should reject a plan to suspend the nonpartisan redistricting program they approved 17 years ago. DeMaio appeared to agree on Monday. 'If we stop it in court, fine,' he said at a press conference in the state Capitol. 'But more than likely it will have to be stopped at the ballot box.' Also Monday, DeMaio submitted a proposed initiative for the 2026 state ballot that would ban any legislators from seeking any elected office for 10 years who voted to put Newsom's redistricting measure on the ballot. 'There is no free ride on casting a corrupt vote this week — if a state legislator votes in favor, they better be prepared to get a real job for the next 10 years,' DeMaio said.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Damned if they'll be shortchanged;' Mass. studies equity of payments towns get for state-owned land
How much is cleaner air worth? What's the dollar value of flood control? Local food? How about the value of hiking and hunting and boating? It's in the billions, but for generations, the state's been paying Western Massachusetts cities and towns a pittance in PILOTs – payments in lieu of taxes – that compensate for hosting state parks and forest lands that aren't on the tax rolls, but nonetheless impose costs on communities. 'We have the land out here. Our communities want to steward it,' state Sen. Jo Comerford, D-Northampton, said in an interview Monday. 'They'll be damned if they'll be shortchanged.' Last week, Gov. Maura T. Healey announced that a new commission will work on the issue of payments in lieu of taxes for state-owned land. The panel is expected to advise Healey on potential reforms to the PILOT program that could include the economic benefit for conservation and the value added by helping the state reach its carbon-reduction goals. 'We are calling it ecosystem services,' said state Rep. Natalie M. Blais, D-Deerfield. Comerford and Blais introduced legislation in 2023 and again this year to change the formula based on the recommendations of a 2020 report by former state Auditor Suzanne M. Bump. Blais and Comerford welcomed Healey's move, saying in interviews Monday that it follows up on legislative changes they've advocated for years. The PILOT issues cropped up for decades, with calls for change gaining steam with Bump's report on how the formula for determining PILOTs puts rural communities in Western Massachusetts at a disadvantage compared to towns in affluent areas. Since Bump's report, the state has been budgeting more money to make PILOT payments. But who gets how much of that fund is still determined by the market value of area real estate. In the Pioneer Valley and Berkshires, where property values go up more slowly or not at all, this means towns get less money. The average PILOT on state-owned land paid by the Commonwealth to a town in Hampden County was $59 an acre as of 2024. In Berkshire County it was $33 an acre and in Hampshire County, $61. In Worcester County, the average was $85 an acre. But the numbers go up as one heads east. In Suffolk County, which includes Boston, the payment was more than $5,000 an acre, Blais and Comerford said, based on state statistics. In the town of Warwick, in Franklin County, the PILOT amount was $13 an acre for each of 11,870 acres. That's half of Warwick's landmass, Blais said. Hosting public lands costs towns, said Donald F. Humason, town administrator in Chester and a former mayor of Westfield who also served as a Republican state senator and state representative. 'We still have to provide fire protection and police protection for the parkland within our town,' Humason said. 'We have to respond if there are trees down. Our municipal services are used, but it's not paid for.' In May the Chester Volunteer Fire Department tracked down two lost hikers near Sanderson Brook Falls, a popular recreation spot in the Chester-Blandford State Forest. Chester also gets a similarly small payment from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as compensation for the presence of the Knightville and Littleville dam properties partially in the town. Massachusetts freely promotes outdoor recreation as a positive, which it is, Humason said. 'We end up being the hosts.' Blais and Comerford cited towns that turn down land conservation projects because they can't afford the lost revenue when privately owned land goes off the tax rolls. That's a problem because there are a number of large-scale preservation efforts underway, including the Kestrel Land Trust buying timber property from W. D. Cowls. Comerford said meeting the state's climate and environmental goals will require contributions from Western Massachusetts and its land resources. 'Natural habitat, carbon sequestration, outdoor travel,' Comerford said, ticking off assets in the region. 'You name it, Western Mass. is holding it down for the Commonwealth.' Read the original article on MassLive. Solve the daily Crossword
