Nevada Democrat introduces proposal to ban book bans
Assembly Bill 416 from Democratic Assem. Brittney Miller, who is also chair of the Assembly Judiciary Committee, would prevent a school's governing body 'from limiting access to library materials by pupils under certain circumstances' and create penalties for people who essentially ban items from school libraries.
'Banning book bans is essential to upholding the First Amendment because it protects our fundamental right to free speech and the free exchange of ideas,' Miller said in a statement Monday. 'AB416 will ensure that individuals — not the government — decide what they read, write or think. Book bans silence voices, limit access to diverse perspectives, and suppresses free speech.'
Existing law allows a district attorney or city attorney to file a court order to have a book deemed 'obscene.' A Legislative Counsel digest includes guidance that obscenity related to books involves '[lack of] serious literary artistic, political or scientific value' and the depiction of 'certain sexual acts, excretory functions, sadism or masochism or lewdly exhibits the genitals.'
The proposal would make it a Category E felony to 'threaten or attempt to use any force, intimidation, coercion, violence, restraint or undue influence' to 'prevent a pupil from using or accessing library materials; or induce or compel the board of trustees of a school district, the governing body of a charter school or a school employee to violate' the non-banning provisions.
The law would also make it a Category E felony to 'dox' a school board trustee or employee.
The Clark County School District, Nevada's largest, updated its instruction material policy last December, including a process for challenging books involving a committee.
A hearing was scheduled for April 8.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
11 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
California pushes partisan plan for new Democratic districts to counter Texas in fight for US House
LOS ANGELES — California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Thursday his state will hold a Nov. 4 special election to seek approval of redrawn districts intended to give Democrats five more U.S. House seats in the fight for control of Congress. The move is a direct response to a similar Republican-led effort in Texas, pushed by President Donald Trump as his party seeks to maintain its slim House majority in the midterm elections. The nation's two most populous states have emerged as the center of a partisan turf war in the House that could spiral into other states — as well as the courts — in what amounts to a proxy war ahead of the 2026 elections. Texas lawmakers are considering a new map that could help them send five more Republicans to Washington. Democrats who so far have halted a vote by leaving the state announced Thursday that they will return home if Texas Republicans end their current special session and California releases its own recast map proposal. Both were expected to happen Friday. However, Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott is expected to call another special session to push through new maps. Texas House Democrats planning their departure from Illinois and back to AustinIn Los Angeles, Newsom staged what amounted to a campaign kickoff rally for the as-yet unreleased new maps with the state's Democratic leadership in a downtown auditorium packed with union members, legislators and abortion rights supporters. Newsom and other speakers veered from discussing the technical grist of reshaping districts — known as redistricting — and instead depicted the looming battle as a conflict with all things Trump, tying it explicitly to the fate of American democracy. 'We can't stand back and watch this democracy disappear district by district all across the country,' Newsom said. 'We are not bystanders in this world. We can shape the future.' An overarching theme was the willingness to stand up to Trump, a cheer-inducing line for Democrats as the party looks to regroup from its 2024 losses. 'Donald Trump, you have poked the bear and we will punch back,' said Newsom, a possible 2028 presidential contender. Thursday's announcement marks the first time any state beyond Texas has officially waded into the mid-decade redistricting fight. The Texas plan was stalled when minority Democrats fled to Illinois, New York and Massachusetts on Aug. 3 to stop the Legislature from passing any bills. Elsewhere, leaders from red Florida to blue New York are threatening to write new maps. In Missouri, a document obtained by The Associated Press shows the state Senate received a $46,000 invoice to activate six redistricting software licenses and provide training for up to 10 staff members. In California, lawmakers must officially declare the special election, which they plan to do next week after voting on the new maps. Democrats hold supermajorities in both chambers — enough to act without any Republican votes — and Newsom said he's not worried about winning the required support from two-thirds of lawmakers to advance the maps. Newsom encouraged other Democratic-led states to get involved. 'We need to stand up — not just California. Other blue states need to stand up,' Newsom said. Republicans hold a 219-212 majority in the U.S. House, with four vacancies. New maps are typically drawn once a decade after the census is conducted. Many states, including Texas, give legislators the power to draw maps. California is among states that rely on an independent commission that is supposed to be nonpartisan. The California map would take effect only if a Republican state moves forward, and it would remain through the 2030 elections. After that, Democrats say they would return mapmaking power to the independent commission approved by voters more than a decade ago. Some people already have said they would sue to block the effort, and influential voices including former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger may campaign against it. 'Gavin Newsom's latest stunt has nothing to do with Californians and everything to do with consolidating radical Democrat power, silencing California voters, and propping up his pathetic 2028 presidential pipe dream,' National Republican Congressional Committee spokesperson Christian Martinez said in a statement. 'Newsom's made it clear: he'll shred California's Constitution and trample over democracy — running a cynical, self-serving playbook where Californians are an afterthought and power is the only priority.' California Democrats hold 43 of the state's 52 House seats, and the state has some of the most competitive House seats. Outside Newsom's news conference Thursday, U.S. Border Patrol agents conducted patrols, drawing condemnation from the governor and others. 'We're here making Los Angeles a safer place since we don't have politicians that will do that,' Gregory Bovino, chief of the patrol's El Centro, California, sector, told a reporter with KTTV in Los Angeles. He said he didn't know Newsom was inside nearby.
The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Mississippi social media law upheld
In an emergency ruling Thursday, the justices denied internet trade group NetChoice's request to reinstate a lower court's order protecting social media giants like Meta, X and YouTube from the new requirements. The Supreme Court did not explain its order or disclose the vote count, as is typical in emergency cases. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, however, wrote a solo opinion cautioning that NetChoice is likely to ultimately succeed on its First Amendment claims even though he was siding against the group at this stage. 'In short, under this Court's case law as it currently stands, the Mississippi law is likely unconstitutional,' Kavanaugh's brief opinion reads. 'Nonetheless, because NetChoice has not sufficiently demonstrated that the balance of harms and equities favors it at this time, I concur in the Court's denial of the application for interim relief,' the conservative justice continued. NetChoice had asked the court to intervene after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit lifted the district judge's decision shielding the platforms from the 2024 law without explanation. 'Neither NetChoice nor this Court can know why the Fifth Circuit believed this law satisfies the First Amendment's stringent demands or deviated from the seven other decisions enjoining similar laws,' NetChoice wrote in its request. It argued it would face 'immediate, irreparable' injury should the law be allowed to go into effect. Mississippi's law establishes requirements for social media companies to confirm their users' ages. Minors must have express consent from a parent or guardian to use the platform, and covered websites must strive to eliminate their exposure to harmful material or face a $10,000 fine. U.S. District Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden found the law unconstitutional as applied to NetChoice members YouTube, X, Snapchat, Reddit, Pinterest, Nextdoor, Dreamwidth and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram. The Hill's Ella Lee has more here.
Buzz Feed
41 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
Jillian Michaels Has Meltdown During CNN Slavery Talk
Biggest Loser coach and Donald Trump supporter Jillian Michaels had a stunning meltdown Wednesday night while defending white people during a fiery debate about the president's efforts to rewrite US history. Michaels appeared on a CNN NewsNight panel with conservative commentator Scott Jennings, Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), Democratic strategist Julie Roginsky, and legal analyst Elie Honig to discuss Trump's pick for Kennedy Center honoree. The conversation took a sharp turn when Roginsky, discussing changes Trump has spearheaded at the Kennedy Center and the Smithsonian Institution, accused the president of 'trying to change culture' and revise history so it does not offend his MAGA base. 'Can you address some of those things in there? Because have you looked at some of the things in there?' Michaels asked, referring to historical displays at the Smithsonian Institution. 'Yeah. Yes, slavery was a bad thing we should talk about,' Roginsky said before Michaels interrupted. 'He's not whitewashing slavery,' the fitness guru argued. 'And you cannot tie imperialism and racism and slavery to just one race, which is pretty much what every single exhibit does.' Michaels: You cannot tie imperialism and racism and slavery to just one race, which is pretty much what every single exhibit does… Only less than 2% of white Americans own slaves. You realize that slavery is thousands of years old? Phillip: I'm very surprised you are trying to… — Acyn (@Acyn) August 14, 2025 @Acyn/ CNN / Via The CNN panel erupted in cross-talk, and Michaels turned to Torres and asked, 'Do you realize that only less than 2% of white Americans owned slaves?' citing a contested figure. 'But it was a system of white supremacy,' Torres responded. As people continued to talk over each other, Michaels added that slavery is thousands of years old, but was interrupted by a stunned Phillip, who said she was 'surprised' that her guest was 'trying to litigate who was the beneficiary of slavery.' 'In the context of American history, what are you saying is incorrect by saying it was white people oppressing Black people?' Phillip asked. 'Every single thing is like, oh, no, no, no, this is all because 'white people bad,' and that's just not the truth,' Michaels said. Michaels then characterized a Smithsonian exhibit as claiming that people 'migrated from Cuba because 'white people bad,'' before accusing Roginsky of not knowing what's in the museum. But the exhibit Michaels called out didn't actually appear to make that argument. Later that night, she posted a photo of an exhibit that names US foreign policy as a contributor to political instability in Cuba and the Dominican Republic. The pictured exhibit did not expressly mention white people at all, except to note that some of the first Cubans to immigrate to the US were 'wealthy White Cubans.' Ok... so for anyone watching me on @CNN tonight battling it out on Abby Phillip's show... this is one of the Smithsonian exhibits I was referencing. Trump is not trying to "erase slavery" by suggesting some of the instillations there are inaccurate and bias. Notice how it omits… — Jillian Michaels (@JillianMichaels) August 14, 2025 @jillianmichaels / Via During her appearance on CNN, the fitness influencer also griped about other elements of the Smithsonian.'Do you know that when you walk in the front door, the first thing you see is the gay flag?' asked Michaels, who is married to a woman. She then started to criticize an exhibit that touches on gender testing in sports before Phillip interjected, 'We don't have time to litigate all of this.' CNN / Via 'Of course we don't, because then you're going to lose the argument, and if everything is racialized, just like you're trying to do to me now,' Michaels told Phillip. 'Excuse me? Jillian, you brought up race,' Phillip said. 'This was a conversation about the arts, and you brought up race.' — Acyn (@Acyn) August 14, 2025 @Acyn/ CNN / Via
