Book bans could escalate after Department of Education dismisses censorship complaints
The U.S. Department of Education is stepping away from the fight over book bans, a move civil rights groups warn could give local officials more power to censor books on race, gender and identity.
Why it matters: Librarians and legal experts argue that book bans threaten First Amendment rights, warning that government censorship jeopardizes free speech and silences marginalized voices.
"If you want to control people, you interfere with their access to information," Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the Office for Intellectual Freedom at the American Library Association (ALA), told Axios.
"That's why we're telling people to come together and unite against book bans. Everyone has the power to resist — whether by voting, showing up at board meetings, or supporting their local libraries."
Catch up quick: On Jan. 24, the DOE's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) dismissed 11 complaints related to book bans and rescinded guidance that had previously suggested such bans could violate civil rights laws.
The OCR contended that removing "age-inappropriate" books is a matter of local control, not a civil rights violation.
The DOE also eliminated its book ban coordinator position, indicating a broader rollback of federal oversight regarding school censorship.
What they're saying: The ALA condemned the DOE's decision as a dangerous dismissal of censorship issues, warning that ideological book removals are unconstitutional and have been ruled against by courts.
"This isn't just about banning books — it's about controlling education and access to information," Caldwell-Stone told Axios. "And it's getting worse."
The ALA urged Americans to attend school board and library meetings to combat government overreach.
Friction point: Caldwell-Stone warns that the DOE's decision could undermine these legal battles, shifting the fight entirely to local school boards and state legislatures.
"We are seeing courts reject the idea that government officials can dictate what we're allowed to read," she said. "But without federal oversight, school boards and libraries are under enormous pressure to censor content."
Jeffrey R. Henig, an education policy expert at Columbia University, warns of federal intervention in local curricula.
"This administration is likely to use federal funding to pressure schools into restricting discussions on race, history, and systemic inequalities — taking the Florida model and expanding it nationally," Henig said.
The big picture: Since 2021, 44 states have proposed laws restricting discussions on race and gender, fueling a surge in book bans. Advocacy groups report thousands of challenges, mainly targeting books on race, gender and identity.
Laws in several states — including Florida, Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama — have placed restrictions on classroom discussions about race and identity.
The ALA recorded 414 censorship attempts in the first eight months of 2024, affecting 1,128 unique titles.
PEN America reported more than 10,000 book bans in public schools during the 2023–24 school year, marking an all-time high.
What they're saying:"During Jim Crow, segregationists banned civil rights literature because they didn't want people to see how unjust segregation was," said Ibram X. Kendi, an acclaimed author and scholar whose book " How to Be an Antiracist" has been targeted in recent bans.
"Today, those trying to conserve racism are banning anti-racist books to keep people from understanding that racism still exists — and still harms people."
Martha S. Jones, a historian at Johns Hopkins University, says book bans disproportionately target marginalized voices.
Her book" Vanguard: How Black Women Broke Barriers, Won the Vote, and Insisted on Equality for All" was challenged at a Louisiana library for "not telling both sides of the story."
"The problem is that some people in history don't look very good," Jones said. "The book tells the truth about those who worked to keep Black women from voting. That's history — it's not always polite, and it's not always pretty."
What's next: With the DOE backing away from oversight, censorship battles will increasingly play out at the state and local level.
"The fight is far from over," Caldwell-Stone said. "This is about power — who controls what we learn, what we read, and ultimately, what we think."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
13 minutes ago
- Axios
Behind the Curtain: The scariest AI reality
The wildest, scariest, indisputable truth about AI's large language models is that the companies building them don't know exactly why or how they work. Sit with that for a moment. The most powerful companies, racing to build the most powerful superhuman intelligence capabilities — ones they readily admit occasionally go rogue to make things up, or even threaten their users — don't know why their machines do what they do. Why it matters: With the companies pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into willing superhuman intelligence into a quick existence, and Washington doing nothing to slow or police them, it seems worth dissecting this Great Unknown. None of the AI companies dispute this. They marvel at the mystery — and muse about it publicly. They're working feverishly to better understand it. They argue you don't need to fully understand a technology to tame or trust it. Two years ago, Axios managing editor for tech Scott Rosenberg wrote a story, "AI's scariest mystery," saying it's common knowledge among AI developers that they can't always explain or predict their systems' behavior. And that's more true than ever. Yet there's no sign that the government or companies or general public will demand any deeper understanding — or scrutiny — of building a technology with capabilities beyond human understanding. They're convinced the race to beat China to the most advanced LLMs warrants the risk of the Great Unknown. The House, despite knowing so little about AI, tucked language into President Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill" that would prohibit states and localities from any AI regulations for 10 years. The Senate is considering limitations on the provision. Neither the AI companies nor Congress understands the power of AI a year from now, much less a decade from now. The big picture: Our purpose with this column isn't to be alarmist or " doomers." It's to clinically explain why the inner workings of superhuman intelligence models are a black box, even to the technology's creators. We'll also show, in their own words, how CEOs and founders of the largest AI companies all agree it's a black box. Let's start with a basic overview of how LLMs work, to better explain the Great Unknown: LLMs — including Open AI's ChatGPT, Anthropic's Claude and Google's Gemini — aren't traditional software systems following clear, human-written instructions, like Microsoft Word. In the case of Word, it does precisely what it's engineered to do. Instead, LLMs are massive neural networks — like a brain — that ingest massive amounts of information (much of the internet) to learn to generate answers. The engineers know what they're setting in motion, and what data sources they draw on. But the LLM's size — the sheer inhuman number of variables in each choice of "best next word" it makes — means even the experts can't explain exactly why it chooses to say anything in particular. We asked ChatGPT to explain this (and a human at OpenAI confirmed its accuracy): "We can observe what an LLM outputs, but the process by which it decides on a response is largely opaque. As OpenAI's researchers bluntly put it, 'we have not yet developed human-understandable explanations for why the model generates particular outputs.'" "In fact," ChatGPT continued, "OpenAI admitted that when they tweaked their model architecture in GPT-4, 'more research is needed' to understand why certain versions started hallucinating more than earlier versions — a surprising, unintended behavior even its creators couldn't fully diagnose." Anthropic — which just released Claude 4, the latest model of its LLM, with great fanfare — admitted it was unsure why Claude, when given access to fictional emails during safety testing, threatened to blackmail an engineer over a supposed extramarital affair. This was part of responsible safety testing — but Anthropic can't fully explain the irresponsible action. Again, sit with that: The company doesn't know why its machine went rogue and malicious. And, in truth, the creators don't really know how smart or independent the LLMs could grow. Anthropic even said Claude 4 is powerful enough to pose a greater risk of being used to develop nuclear or chemical weapons. OpenAI's Sam Altman and others toss around the tame word of " interpretability" to describe the challenge. "We certainly have not solved interpretability," Altman told a summit in Geneva last year. What Altman and others mean is they can't interpret the why: Why are LLMs doing what they're doing? Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, in an essay in April called "The Urgency of Interpretability," warned: "People outside the field are often surprised and alarmed to learn that we do not understand how our own AI creations work. They are right to be concerned: this lack of understanding is essentially unprecedented in the history of technology." Amodei called this a serious risk to humanity — yet his company keeps boasting of more powerful models nearing superhuman capabilities. Anthropic has been studying the interpretability issue for years, and Amodei has been vocal about warning it's important to solve. In a statement for this story, Anthropic said: "Understanding how AI works is an urgent issue to solve. It's core to deploying safe AI models and unlocking [AI's] full potential in accelerating scientific discovery and technological development. We have a dedicated research team focused on solving this issue, and they've made significant strides in moving the industry's understanding of the inner workings of AI forward. It's crucial we understand how AI works before it radically transforms our global economy and everyday lives." (Read a paper Anthropic published last year, "Mapping the Mind of a Large Language Model.") Elon Musk has warned for years that AI presents a civilizational risk. In other words, he literally thinks it could destroy humanity, and has said as much. Yet Musk is pouring billions into his own LLM called Grok. "I think AI is a significant existential threat," Musk said in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, last fall. There's a 10%-20% chance "that it goes bad." Reality check: Apple published a paper last week, "The Illusion of Thinking," concluding that even the most advanced AI reasoning models don't really "think," and can fail when stress-tested. The study found that state-of-the-art models (OpenAI's o3-min, DeepSeek R1 and Anthropic's Claude-3.7-Sonnet) still fail to develop generalizable problem-solving capabilities, with accuracy ultimately collapsing to zero "beyond certain complexities." But a new report by AI researchers, including former OpenAI employees, called " AI 2027," explains how the Great Unknown could, in theory, turn catastrophic in less than two years. The report is long and often too technical for casual readers to fully grasp. It's wholly speculative, though built on current data about how fast the models are improving. It's being widely read inside the AI companies. It captures the belief — or fear — that LLMs could one day think for themselves and start to act on their own. Our purpose isn't to alarm or sound doomy. Rather, you should know what the people building these models talk about incessantly. You can dismiss it as hype or hysteria. But researchers at all these companies worry LLMs, because we don't fully understand them, could outsmart their human creators and go rogue. In the AI 2027 report, the authors warn that competition with China will push LLMs potentially beyond human control, because no one will want to slow progress even if they see signs of acute danger. The safe-landing theory: Google's Sundar Pichai — and really all of the big AI company CEOs — argue that humans will learn to better understand how these machines work and find clever, if yet unknown ways, to control them and " improve lives." The companies all have big research and safety teams, and a huge incentive to tame the technologies if they want to ever realize their full value.
Axios
14 minutes ago
- Axios
Popular Stephen Starr restaurants boycotted by Democrats
Top Democrats in the House and Senate are boycotting hot Washington, D.C. restaurants that include those owned by famed Philadelphia restaurateur Stephen Starr over labor disputes. Why it matters: The targeted restaurants in Starr's empire include some of the buzziest spots for Democratic fundraisers. Driving the news: More than 50 House and Senate Democrats have signed onto Unite Here Local 25's pledge to avoid six D.C. venues. Zoom in: Starr, who is a Democratic donor, is facing boycotts of his Le Diplomate, Osteria Mozza and The Occidental. The other three boycotted restaurants are founded by chef Ashok Bajaj of Knightsbridge Restaurant Group. The list: Among the signers are some of Democrats' top fundraisers and biggest names, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are also on the list. Meanwhile, Philly Reps. Brendan Boyle, Dwight Evans and Mary Gay Scanlon signed the boycott list, per Unite Here's website. U.S. Sen. John Fetterman and Philly-regional Rep. Madeleine Dean were not on the pledge list as of Friday. Between the lines: Political groups and candidates have spent thousands of dollars at those spots over the past year, federal campaign records show. Former President Obama and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos made headlines when they dined at Osteria Mozza in January. Then-President Biden was a repeat customer at Le Diplomate during his presidency. What they're saying: Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told Axios: "We can have big policy debates, but we also have to show the American people some concrete examples." He added: "This is our opportunity when we're here in Washington, D.C. to not just go vote in the Capitol but actually go out in the community and make a difference." "We can say that all members on the list are personally boycotting," Benjy Cannon, a spokesperson for the union, told Axios in a message. "Many of them have been meeting personally with STARR and Knightsbridge workers all year." The other side:"Local 25's call for a boycott is baseless," Starr restaurants said in a statement. "A boycott of any kind can result in lost hours, wages, and tips that hardworking employees rely upon." "It is unfortunate that an organization that claims to want to represent employees would call for an action that would harm them." "We respect our employees' wishes," Bajaj said. "How many of these congress members even know themselves that they're signing?" Zoom out: Starr's restaurant group has accused Unite Here Local 25 of overly aggressive tactics. That includes union reps showing up with petitions outside employees' homes, leading one bartender to sign it even though she planned to vote against a union, as Eater reported in February. Francisco López, a Le Diplomate server of five years, told Axios some employees are holding counter protests to the union.
USA Today
26 minutes ago
- USA Today
When is Trump's military parade? What to know ahead of June 14
The streets of central D.C. are soon to be filled with thousands of soldiers, massive tanks and artillery, and the cacophonic rumble of Vintage warplanes and sleek Blackhawks flying overhead. That's because the U.S. Army is marking its 250th anniversary with a pomp-filled procession through the streets of the nation's capital Saturday, June 14, showcasing military might in a display with few, if any, precedents. The date also coincides with President Donald Trump's 79th birthday. The parade, which will feature Army equipment, flyovers, musical performances and thousands of soldiers in uniforms from the past and the present, caps off a week of programming designed to celebrate the country's military might. Trump posted a short video address about the parade to Truth Social on Friday, June 6, inviting Americans to what he called an "unforgettable" celebration, "one like you've never seen before." "For two and a half centuries, the men and women of America's Army have dominated our enemies and protected our freedom at home," he said in the video. "This parade salutes our soldiers' remarkable strength and unbeatable spirit. You won't want to miss it. Just don't miss this one. It's going to be good." Here's what to know about the parade and day-long celebration in Washington, D.C. When and where is the June 14 DC military parade? The military parade is slated for Saturday, June 14, in the heart of Washington, D.C., spanning six blocks and bisecting the National Mall. Organizers say the procession begins at 6:30 p.m. ET. What are the events and performances at the June 14 celebration? Celebrations and associated events are set to take place throughout the day at the Army Birthday Festival starting at 11 a.m. ET. Members of the public can visit, where there will be military demonstrations, equipment displays and live music throughout the day, Army event organizers say Visitors can expect kid zones, more than 50 vendors and experience booths and meet-and-greets with "Army soldiers, NFL players, influencers and celebrities," according to the U.S. Army event page. Those feeling adventurous can show up early and take part in the Army's fitness competition, from 9:30 a.m. to noon. There will be several musical acts throughout the June 14 celebration, including country singer Scotty Hasting, a former Army infantryman who was wounded in Afghanistan, country singer Noah Hicks of Nashville and DJ Nyla Symone. The Army's birthday parade will cross in front of Trump's viewing stand on Constitution Avenue, just south of the White House, around sundown. The president is also expected to attend an enlistment and re-enlistment ceremony after the parade. A parachute demonstration by the Golden Knights and a fireworks display and evening concert will conclude the festivities. Where is the Army Birthday Festival? The festival is between 14th Street SW and the 12th Street Expressway on the lawn between Madison Drive NW and Jefferson Drive SW, from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. ET. It is next to the Smithsonian Metro Station NW entrance, which will be closed, organizers say, though the Smithsonian Metro Station SW entrance will be open. Information is also available on the Army's event website, What does the parade celebrate? Is it Trump's birthday parade? Though the parade is on the same day as the president's 79th birthday, event organizers and administration officials say it is solely to celebrate the U.S. Army. The administration has insisted that the Army's anniversary and Trump's birthday are a coincidence and that the parade is justified to honor soldiers' sacrifice. Plans for the June 14 parade began in earnest about a month ago. Yet as focus squares in on the U.S. Army's 250 years of existence, other branches are notably left out. The Navy, which also celebrates its 250th anniversary this year in October, has no plans for a similar parade, a spokesperson told USA TODAY. Neither does the Marine Corps, for its 250th in November. Inside the military parade: Tanks, cannons and soldiers sleeping in DC offices How to get tickets to attend in person Tickets for the parade are limited, but those interested in attending the parade on June 14 can RSVP here. Prospective attendees will be asked to provide their full name, phone number, email, state and zip code. Where does the 'Grand Military Parade' start and end? The parade will take place along Constitution Avenue NW, starting on Constitution Avenue NW and 23rd Street and ending on 15th Street alongside the National Mall, near the National Museum of African American History and Culture. Graphic of Parade Route: See where the procession will go through central DC How to watch the June 14 parade Events from the 250th birthday celebration, including the parade, will be livestreamed on all U.S. Army social media platforms. Contributing: Cybele Mayes-Osterman, Tom Vanden Brook Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her atkapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
