Latest news with #RighttoReadND
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
North Dakota governor vetoes controversial library content bill
A protester displays a sign along Boulevard Avenue near the North Dakota Capitol in Bismarck as part of the national No Kings protests on April 19, 2025. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor) North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong vetoed a library content bill, calling it 'a misguided attempt to legislate morality through overreach and censorship.' The Republican said in a veto message Wednesday that Senate Bill 2307 is redundant with legislation approved two years ago and is overly burdensome for librarians, school districts and state's attorneys. 'The bill imposes vague and punitive burdens on professionals and opens the door to a host of unintended and damaging consequences for our communities,' Armstrong said. The bill narrowly passed the Senate and the House, making it unlikely that lawmakers would have enough votes to override the veto. The bill, sponsored by Sen. Keith Boehm, R-Mandan, sought to require school and public libraries to remove content deemed 'sexually explicit' to areas not easily accessible to children. It also proposed that local state's attorneys would investigate and prosecute violations, and state funds could be withheld from schools or libraries in violation. The state estimated it would cost $2 million in the first four years to implement the bill by adding an age-verification system for an online database used by North Dakota libraries. Local state's attorneys and libraries would likely see additional costs, according to testimony on the bill. Armstrong called the process in the bill 'completely unworkable.' He raised concerns about books such as 'The Diary of a Young Girl' by Anne Frank, 'The Kite Runner' and '1984' as other books that have been targeted by obscenity laws. 'I don't pretend to know what the next literary masterpiece is going to be,' Armstrong wrote. 'But I know that I want it available in a library.' About 1,000 people participated in silent protests at 17 libraries around the state in March to show their opposition to the bill. More than 2,000 people sent Armstrong messages urging him to veto the bill through an action alert by Right to Read ND, a nonpartisan group that opposed the bill. The group argued that the bill is unnecessary, expensive and violates First Amendment rights. 'This veto protects teachers and librarians in North Dakota from frivolous lawsuits and ensures they can continue to provide quality library services to their local communities,' said Randi Monley and Mariah Ralston, Right to Read ND co-chairs, in a joint statement. 'We hope the North Dakota Legislature will also listen to their constituents' concerns and sustain the governor's veto.' Opponents also said libraries already have local review processes for content that is challenged. During hearings on the bill, supporters pointed to examples of books that were challenged at local libraries but not removed. Rep. Mike Brandenburg, R-Edgeley, said his constituents wanted lawmakers to take action on library content, citing a book from the 'Heartstopper' LGBTQ+ graphic novel series that some parents objected to in the Forman school library. Former Gov. Doug Burgum vetoed a similar library content bill in the 2023 legislative session, but signed another one that required sexually explicit content to be removed from children's sections. Lawmakers would need 32 votes in the Senate and 63 votes in the House to override Armstrong's veto. The bill passed on a 27-20 vote in the Senate and 49-45 vote in the House. SB 2307 veto message signed
Yahoo
03-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Jamestown residents protest bill targeting library content
Mar. 3—JAMESTOWN — About 40 people showed up in front of the Alfred Dickey Public Library on Saturday, March 1, in Jamestown to protest a bill in the state Legislature that targets library content. Senate Bill 2307 would prohibit public libraries and school districts from maintaining explicit sexual material in an area accessible to minors. Right to Read ND — a nonpartisan group of parents and citizens dedicated to defending the state's right to access information freely and without discrimination — organized local read outs across North Dakota on Saturday. From 2 to 2:30 p.m., participants read silently on the sidewalk outside their local libraries. Barb Lang, local coordinator for Right to Read ND, said the turnout in Jamestown was "great" considering there wasn't much time to organize the read out. "We've got people here I certainly didn't realize are going to be coming," she said. She said the participants were quietly indicating that they don't support Senate Bill 2307 and want it to die in the House. "We hope our local legislators in the house will oppose the bill," she said. Jamestown resident Olivia Schloegel, who participated in the read out, said the wide variety of people who came on Saturday shows there is wide opposition to SB 2307. "It's a bill that's just not needed," she said. "Our libraries have mechanisms for making sure the appropriate books are in the appropriate spaces. Parents go to the library with their children. Libraries should be a place of exploration, not government overreach in terms of what we should or shouldn't read." James River Valley Library System Director Joe Rector said the read out was not organized by the library system but the support in opposition to SB 2307 was appreciated. "There are so many readers who are here and they are all here expressing their support for the library and for information freedom and for making sure materials in the library reflect our entire community," he said. "It's really affirming to us who work at the library to see the passion that everyone has for upholding the library as really central to what we do in our community when essentially, intellectually, this is a place where people can get information that they need for their lives." The North Dakota Senate passed SB 2307 on a 27-20 vote. The bill was sent to the House for consideration. Sen. Cole Conley, R-Jamestown, who voted in support of SB 2307, said it is the right for anyone to protest in opposition to a bill. "It's a free country," he said. Conley said he voted in favor of the bill because it doesn't make sense to have what people might consider explicit sexual material in the children's section. "I think that's perfectly reasonable to say that you just can't have it in the children's section of the library," he said. Sen. Terry Wanzek, R-Jamestown, also voted in favor of SB 2307. SB 2307 would require public libraries and school districts to develop a policy and review process by Jan. 1 for library collections to ensure explicit sexual material is not in an area accessible to minors. The policy must include a procedure for the relocation of materials to an area not easily accessible to minors upon a request from an individual to relocate explicit sexual material, the activation of a diverse decision-making committee to reconsider the relocation of explicit sexual material in the library if the individual is unsatisfied with the relocation of the material, and to refer an individual to to an obscenity review procedure by a local state's attorney if the individual is not satisfied with the result of the decision-making committee's decision on a relocation. The bill also requires safety policies and technology protection measures for digital or online database resources offered by a school district, state agency or public library to students in grades K-12. The bill requires a school district, state agency or public library to have safety policies and technology protection measures to prohibit and prevent a user of the resource from sending, receiving, viewing or downloading materials constituting an obscene performance of explicit sexual material and to filter or block access to that material. If a provider of digital or online library resources fails to comply with having safety policies and technology protection measures, the school district, state agency or public library shall withhold any further payments to the provider pending verification of compliance, the bill says. The bill also creates an obscenity review procedure where any person may request a local state's attorney's opinion to review if material in a library or school district has explicit sexual material. The state's attorney would need to issue an opinion on the alleged violation within 60 days to the interested person, provider of digital or online library database resources, school district, state agency or public library under review. If it is determined that a public library or state agency is in violation, the state's attorney shall defer any prosecution and notify the public library, state agency or school district. After the notice is received, the public library, state agency or school district must take corrective action to comply with the law within 10 days. If the public library or state agency fails to comply with the law within 10 days, the state's attorney would notify the state treasurer if a violation has occurred at a public library or state agency or the superintendent of public instruction if a violation has occurred at a school district. The state treasurer or the superintendent of public instruction would not distribute funds to the school district, state agency or public library until the state's attorney has determined either of the entities are in compliance with SB 2307. The state's attorney may prosecute for failure to comply with the law. Conley said SB 2307 is not a bill to ban books. "They just don't want those materials to be accessible to young children," he said. "They can still be in the library. They just can't be in the children's section." Lang said the turnout at the read out shows that many people feel SB 2307 goes against their First Amendment rights. "It's a very, very important right, and we don't want to see it diminished at all," she said. " Lang said the collection of materials is well managed by the James River Valley Library System staff. "This library takes excellent care and watches over children, students from the junior high particularly come here and do their homework after school," she said. Schloegel agreed. "This library is safe for kids," she said. "We've got great staff. We've got a great, caring community here. To waste the precious time these lawmakers have in Bismarck on bills like this is pretty frustrating." Conley said he doesn't have any concerns with the James River Valley Library System having explicit sexual material that is accessible to minors. He said a list of libraries across the state was sent to him that had a few objectionable books but the James River Valley Library System was not on it. The cost estimate was $54,500 for the library system employees to review materials in the children and teenagers sections for explicit sexual material after the Legislature passed a bill in 2023 to remove or relocate that material, The Jamestown Sun reported in June 2024. At the time, Rector said it took an estimated 2,770 hours for 15 employees to review the materials. "That's not the state paying for that," Schloegel said. "That's the taxpayers of Jamestown paying for their librarians to have to do this." Conley said that cost estimate is not true. He said the task was part of the employees' salaries. "Just because they had them reading some books which they wouldn't have had to do ... it was my understanding that libraries were furnished a list of the books that were kind of deemed objectionable and all they had to do was grab them and move them to a different section of the library," he said. "They made a bigger deal of it than it really was, I thought, and they are trying to do that again." Lang and Schloegel urged concerned citizens to contact their local legislators about SB 2307. "If people read about this and want to do more, there's a way to submit testimony online against this bill when it goes to committee, and most importantly, you can individually reach out to your representatives," Schloegel said.
Yahoo
06-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawmakers weigh library censorship. Again.
(Photo illustration by Getty Images) Throughout my life I have seen the power of books and libraries. As a day care provider, I offered kids storytimes in my home and volunteered as a library storytime reader. While growing up in Zap, North Dakota, my five siblings and I were so hungry for the printed word that we even exchanged cereal boxes at the breakfast table. Later, I brought my own children to the Minot Public Library, checking out books for them and for myself. The library became such a large influence on our lives that my daughter grew up to be a library director. This is why I joined Right to Read ND. We are a nonpartisan group of North Dakota citizens who believe that parents, not the government, should supervise reading choices for their own children. We trust our teachers and librarians to curate collections and provide access to information. We reject censorship and fight to protect our First Amendment right to access materials. Once again, North Dakota legislators are trying to censor materials in our libraries. Senate Bill 2307 would require librarians to remove ill-defined 'explicit' materials from our library shelves. The bill's censorship might even extend to digital materials like ebooks, articles, and audiobooks that many North Dakotans access through their local library. These are three of the many issues we at Right to Read ND see with Senate Bill 2307: First, no one can explain how the bill would be implemented. The bill's sponsor, Sen. Keith Boehm, R-Mandan, was recently quoted in an article in the ND News Cooperative, saying he thinks the bill's requirements would be satisfied if each library purchased a cabinet to house 200 books. So, which books would be locked in the cabinet? The legislator's comment sounds like he already has a personal list of books that he feels are inappropriate. However, using one individual's viewpoint to guide what a library removes from their collections violates North Dakotans' First Amendment rights. If libraries pull those books from public circulation, it exposes North Dakota libraries to potential lawsuits from those who can rightfully claim they are being denied access to materials, which is their First Amendment right affirmed through cases such as the U.S. Supreme Court's 1982 ruling in Board of Education v. Pico. The First Amendment protects our right to speak and also our right to receive information. It prevents the government from blocking access, which includes locking books away in a cabinet. Second, it would be costly to taxpayers. Compliance with this bill would require major library renovation especially impacting smaller, rural libraries who would have to remodel to create a barrier between the adult and children's sections. This would be a waste of taxpayer dollars to fund these renovations, funds that could be better used to provide library programs to our communities. Finally, we've already done this. During the 2023 legislative session, House Bill 1205 passed both chambers and put the Federal Miller Test for obscenity into state law. The Miller Test ensures that libraries have age-appropriate materials in children's collections. This law also requires libraries to file a report yearly so the state can make sure they are complying. Legislators are back for more in 2025 with Senate Bill 2307, which elevates the voice of a few over the needs of the many in our local communities. It's time for the Legislature to move on.
