Latest news with #SenateBill536
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
Zakai Zeigler lawyers: New Tennessee law prevents NCAA from keeping Vols player off court
Attorneys for former Tennessee basketball player Zakai Zeigler are trying to utilize a new state law curtailing the NCAA's authority to get him an additional year of eligibility. It's the latest twist in Zeigler's federal lawsuit against the NCAA, which challenges the so-called "Four Seasons" rule. The NCAA allows athletes to play four seasons during a five-year period, which can include a redshirt year. Advertisement Zeigler ran out of NCAA eligibility by playing the past four seasons for UT basketball and not taking a redshirt. He wants to play a fifth season and earn millions of dollars in NIL pay. His attorneys say the NCAA does not have the authority in the state of Tennessee to stop him. The new Tennessee law, Senate Bill 536, allows Tennessee universities and athletes to opt out of NCAA rules if they appear to violate antitrust law. The initial purpose was to shift liability toward the NCAA and conferences and away from the schools in anticipated antitrust lawsuits by athletes unhappy with new player-pay rules in college sports. But broad language in the law – which has not been litigated in any court – strips the NCAA of its power if the association prohibits a Tennessee athlete from earning money. Zeigler's attorneys are seizing on that portion to push for a preliminary injunction that would grant him a fifth year of eligibility. '(The new Tennessee law is) unambiguously clear: Any NCAA action that impacts an athlete's ability to earn NIL compensation or his or her eligibility, like the Four-Seasons Rule, is illegal in Tennessee,' Zeigler's attorneys argued in a brief filed to the Eastern District of Tennessee federal court on June 7. NCAA says Tennessee law is irrelevant in Zakai Zeigler case The NCAA countered, accusing Zeigler of exploiting a law that doesn't apply to his case. Advertisement '(Zeigler's brief) continues his effort to dismantle the NCAA membership's longstanding eligibility rules by any means necessary — this time through a tortured reading of an irrelevant law,' NCAA attorneys wrote in a brief to the court on June 8. 'Common sense dictates that the new Tennessee statute has nothing to do with this case.' The law appeared to be in response to Tennessee v. NCAA, a separate federal lawsuit that challenged the NCAA's rules that prohibited schools from facilitating NIL negotiations with players and recruits. Tennessee and the NCAA reached a settlement in that case in January, the same month that Senate Bill 536 was introduced in the legislature. The new law was signed by Gov. Bill Lee on May 1, and it sparked a fight between UT and power conferences about whether the school had to follow new player-pay rules set forth in the House settlement. Advertisement However, a provision in the new law said the NCAA shall not 'interfere with, prohibit, restrict, or otherwise adversely affect an intercollegiate athlete's ability to earn compensation … and shall not otherwise impact an intercollegiate athlete's eligibility or full participation in intercollegiate athletic events.' Zeigler has used that language in his fight against the NCAA. Federal Judge Katherine Crytzer could invalidate the state law altogether if she wants. Should Tennessee or NCAA decide if Zeigler can keep playing? Zeigler has a guaranteed spot on Tennessee's 2025-26 basketball roster if Crytzer allows it. The latest hearing was held in Knoxville on June 6, and both sides are jockeying for a stronger position. Advertisement Zeigler's attorney, Alex Little, told the judge that Zeigler intends to play for the Vols and was told he had a spot on the team. But Little also said the NCAA wouldn't be able to restrict Zeigler's entrance into the transfer portal, presumably meaning if his injunction request was approved, Zeigler would have the option to play at another school, not just UT. The NCAA argues that its eligibility rules are clear, and Zeigler cannot exceed them. But Zeigler's attorneys say that the law allows UT to determine who plays on its teams, not the NCAA. '(The NCAA) argued that the phrase 'can . . . participate' means that Mr. Zeigler must be eligible to participate under its own eligibility rules,' Zeigler's attorneys argued in a brief. 'But this argument assumes its own premise: that the NCAA — rather than the institution — determines who gets to 'participate in an athletic program (at an institution).'' Mar 22, 2025; Lexington, KY, USA; Tennessee Volunteers guard Zakai Zeigler (5) brings the ball up court during the first half against the UCLA Bruins in the second round of the NCAA Tournament at Rupp Arena. Mandatory Credit: Aaron Doster-Imagn Images NCAA says UT can't support Zeigler and agree to NCAA rules The NCAA sees a contradiction in UT's apparent support of Zeigler and its acceptance of NCAA eligibility rules. After all, member schools like UT make up the NCAA and adopt its rules. Advertisement The House settlement, which resolved three federal antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA and four power conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC), could strengthen the NCAA's position in the Zeigler case. The settlement was approved on June 6, just hours after the conclusion of Zeigler's hearing, and reinforced eligibility rules. The House settlement permitted the NCAA and conferences to cap the number of years an athlete is eligible to receive payments at four years plus a redshirt year, providing that all four of those seasons must be played within a consecutive five-year period. The SEC, which includes UT as a member, agreed to that settlement. 'The State's flagship institution (which happens to be the school Plaintiff attended) is a member of an athletic conference that has agreed to a settlement that expressly affirms the NCAA's Four-Seasons Rule,' NCAA attorneys argued in a brief. 'That same institution, the University of Tennessee, obtained valuable legal releases pursuant to that settlement and unsurprisingly has repeatedly endorsed it. Advertisement 'It is accordingly hard to imagine the Tennessee legislature passing a law so obviously at odds with the University of Tennessee's legal position and interests.' Adam Sparks is the Tennessee football beat reporter. Email X, formerly known as Twitter@AdamSparks. Support strong local journalism by subscribing at Get the latest news and insight on SEC football by subscribing to the SEC Unfiltered newsletter, delivered straight to your inbox. This article originally appeared on Knoxville News Sentinel: Zakai Zeigler lawyers: Tennessee law supersedes NCAA eligibility rule
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
Zakai Zeigler lawyers: New Tennessee law prevents NCAA from keeping Vols player off court
Attorneys for former Tennessee basketball player Zakai Zeigler are trying to utilize a new state law curtailing the NCAA's authority to get him an additional year of eligibility. It's the latest twist in Zeigler's federal lawsuit against the NCAA, which challenges the so-called "Four Seasons" rule. The NCAA allows athletes to play four seasons during a five-year period, which can include a redshirt year. Zeigler ran out of NCAA eligibility by playing the past four seasons for UT basketball and not taking a redshirt. He wants to play a fifth season and earn millions of dollars in NIL pay. His attorneys say the NCAA does not have the authority in the state of Tennessee to stop him. The new Tennessee law, Senate Bill 536, allows Tennessee universities and athletes to opt out of NCAA rules if they appear to violate antitrust law. The initial purpose was to shift liability toward the NCAA and conferences and away from the schools in anticipated antitrust lawsuits by athletes unhappy with new player-pay rules in college sports. But broad language in the law – which has not been litigated in any court – strips the NCAA of its power if the association prohibits a Tennessee athlete from earning money. Zeigler's attorneys are seizing on that portion to push for a preliminary injunction that would grant him a fifth year of eligibility. '(The new Tennessee law is) unambiguously clear: Any NCAA action that impacts an athlete's ability to earn NIL compensation or his or her eligibility, like the Four-Seasons Rule, is illegal in Tennessee,' Zeigler's attorneys argued in a brief filed to the Eastern District of Tennessee federal court on June 7. The NCAA countered, accusing Zeigler of exploiting a law that doesn't apply to his case. '(Zeigler's brief) continues his effort to dismantle the NCAA membership's longstanding eligibility rules by any means necessary — this time through a tortured reading of an irrelevant law,' NCAA attorneys wrote in a brief to the court on June 8. 'Common sense dictates that the new Tennessee statute has nothing to do with this case.' The law appeared to be in response to Tennessee v. NCAA, a separate federal lawsuit that challenged the NCAA's rules that prohibited schools from facilitating NIL negotiations with players and recruits. Tennessee and the NCAA reached a settlement in that case in January, the same month that Senate Bill 536 was introduced in the legislature. The new law was signed by Gov. Bill Lee on May 1, and it sparked a fight between UT and power conferences about whether the school had to follow new player-pay rules set forth in the House settlement. However, a provision in the new law said the NCAA shall not 'interfere with, prohibit, restrict, or otherwise adversely affect an intercollegiate athlete's ability to earn compensation … and shall not otherwise impact an intercollegiate athlete's eligibility or full participation in intercollegiate athletic events.' Zeigler has used that language in his fight against the NCAA. Federal Judge Katherine Crytzer could invalidate the state law altogether if she wants. Zeigler has a guaranteed spot on Tennessee's 2025-26 basketball roster if Crytzer allows it. The latest hearing was held in Knoxville on June 6, and both sides are jockeying for a stronger position. Zeigler's attorney, Alex Little, told the judge that Zeigler intends to play for the Vols and was told he had a spot on the team. But Little also said the NCAA wouldn't be able to restrict Zeigler's entrance into the transfer portal, presumably meaning if his injunction request was approved, Zeigler would have the option to play at another school, not just UT. The NCAA argues that its eligibility rules are clear, and Zeigler cannot exceed them. But Zeigler's attorneys say that the law allows UT to determine who plays on its teams, not the NCAA. '(The NCAA) argued that the phrase 'can . . . participate' means that Mr. Zeigler must be eligible to participate under its own eligibility rules,' Zeigler's attorneys argued in a brief. 'But this argument assumes its own premise: that the NCAA — rather than the institution — determines who gets to 'participate in an athletic program (at an institution).'' The NCAA sees a contradiction in UT's apparent support of Zeigler and its acceptance of NCAA eligibility rules. After all, member schools like UT make up the NCAA and adopt its rules. The House settlement, which resolved three federal antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA and four power conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC), could strengthen the NCAA's position in the Zeigler case. The settlement was approved on June 6, just hours after the conclusion of Zeigler's hearing, and reinforced eligibility rules. The House settlement permitted the NCAA and conferences to cap the number of years an athlete is eligible to receive payments at four years plus a redshirt year, providing that all four of those seasons must be played within a consecutive five-year period. The SEC, which includes UT as a member, agreed to that settlement. 'The State's flagship institution (which happens to be the school Plaintiff attended) is a member of an athletic conference that has agreed to a settlement that expressly affirms the NCAA's Four-Seasons Rule,' NCAA attorneys argued in a brief. 'That same institution, the University of Tennessee, obtained valuable legal releases pursuant to that settlement and unsurprisingly has repeatedly endorsed it. 'It is accordingly hard to imagine the Tennessee legislature passing a law so obviously at odds with the University of Tennessee's legal position and interests.' Adam Sparks is the Tennessee football beat reporter. Email X, formerly known as Twitter@AdamSparks. Support strong local journalism by subscribing at Get the latest news and insight on SEC football by subscribing to the SEC Unfiltered newsletter, delivered straight to your inbox. This article originally appeared on Knoxville News Sentinel: Zakai Zeigler lawyers: Tennessee law supersedes NCAA eligibility rule
Yahoo
14-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Arkansas House will consider proposal to remove and replace entire State Library Board
Kristin Stuart (left) expresses opposition to Senate Bill 640, co-sponsored by Rep. Howard Beaty (right), R-Crossett, before the House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs on Monday, April 14, 2025. The bill would reconstitute the Arkansas State Library Board. (Tess Vrbin/Arkansas Advocate) An Arkansas House committee approved a proposal Monday to remove all seven members of the State Library Board and allow Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders to replace them later this year. Senate Bill 640 passed the Senate Thursday with support from 27 Republicans. Sen. Jonathan Dismang, R-Searcy, and Rep. Howard Beaty, R-Crossett, filed the bill late Wednesday night, less than two hours after Senate Bill 536 hit a dead end with a week left in the legislative session. Beaty was among a bipartisan group of members of the House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs to vote against SB 536. The bill would have abolished both the Arkansas State Library and its board and transferred their powers and responsibilities to the state Department of Education. Beaty told the same committee Monday that the current board should be replaced because of its 'dysfunction' and 'infighting.' Arkansas Senate approves State Library Board overhaul after dissolution bill fails 'There were legitimate concerns that were raised, and those haven't been addressed,' he said. '[It shows] the lack of consideration of what we need in this state and what our constituents are telling us.' Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Jonesboro, filed SB 536 last month in response to the State Library Board's failure to pass two measures he requested as conditions for him to drop his promise to abolish the board. Sullivan has targeted the State Library for its affiliation with the American Library Association, which he claims is a leftist political organization, and for the board's refusal to adopt policies directing public libraries to keep certain materials out of the hands of minors. The board rejected both efforts with a 4-3 vote in March. The latter would have created nonbinding policies to protect children from 'sexually explicit' content in libraries and detached the State Library from the ALA. The three board members who supported Sullivan's requests were all Sanders appointees: former Republican state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, who moved to approve the requests; Shari Bales of Hot Springs, whom the Senate confirmed alongside Rapert; and Sydney McKenzie of Rogers, who joined the board in January and is married to GOP Rep. Brit McKenzie. Rapert has been the board's most outspoken advocate for keeping 'sexually explicit' content out of children's reach and has called for the board's abolition due to the majority's consistent refusal to back his efforts. SB 640 would require the seven new members to draw lots determining how their terms will be staggered, ending between one and seven years from when the bill becomes law. Subsequent appointees would serve seven-year terms, the current length of time board members serve. Those terms end in October every year, and Rep. Julie Mayberry reminded the committee that Sanders will be able to appoint a new board member in just a few months. The Republican lawmaker from Hensley said she would not support SB 640 because she personally knows and respects a State Library Board member. 'I know her work and her dedication to students, to families across the state is exemplary,' Mayberry said. 'There's no reason to eliminate every single position on this board.' Lupe Peña de Martinez of Mabelvale is a former principal at a public school in East End, which is in Mayberry's House district, and her term on the State Library Board is currently set to expire in 2028. At the March board meeting in which Sullivan's two requested motions failed, Peña de Martinez made a successful motion to create nonbinding policies aimed at protecting children in libraries while honoring the First Amendment and library material selection standards. All three Sanders appointees voted against the motion. Nothing in SB 640 would prevent current State Library Board members from being reappointed, said Rep. David Ray, R-Maumelle. He and other Republicans expressed support for the bill as an alternative to SB 536, particularly since SB 640 does not involve the Department of Education in the State Library's responsibilities. Lawmakers and members of the public both included this as a reason to oppose SB 536. Mayberry joined the committee's three Democrats in voting against SB 640. House Minority Leader Andrew Collins, D-Little Rock, challenged Beaty's assertion about State Library Board 'dysfunction.' 'They are continuing to have meetings [and] they are continuing to make decisions, even if they're not the decisions that some people would like,' Collins said. 'It's a functional board. It's just a board that some people disagree with.' Collins said he did not believe the Legislature should set a precedent of reconstituting state boards if some lawmakers are frustrated with them. Beaty said he disagreed and was 'not concerned in the slightest' about setting such a precedent. Kristin Stuart of Little Rock, the only audience member to speak against SB 640, agreed with Collins that the proposal is a 'power grab.' She said reconstituting the board would 'disrupt its mission' of supporting Arkansas libraries and preserving people's access to information and learning. '[SB 640 is] opening the door for political appointees who may not have the experience, objectivity or commitment to intellectual freedom that the board requires,' Stuart said. The State Library Board is scheduled to meet the second Friday in May and in August. If SB 640 passes the House this week and if Sanders signs it, it will go into effect Aug. 1, and it gives Sanders 30 days to replace the board. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
14-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill introduced in Arkansas legislature makes third attempt to disassemble state library board
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – A bill introduced in the Arkansas legislature on Wednesday is an additional attempt to disassemble the state library board. Senate Bill 640 would remove all the current members of the state library board and have Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders appoint seven people in their place for staggered terms. Typically, the governor makes library board appointments for seven-year terms. Jason Rapert calls on Arkansas legislators to abolish state library board The bill comes after two earlier bills to eliminate the board and turn it over to the Department of Education (DOE) failed to reach the Senate floor after appearing in committee. Senate Bill 184 intended to abolish both the board and the state Educational Television Commission but was withdrawn by its sponsor, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Jonesboro), who explained to the committee that he had come to an agreement with the television commission about needed changes. Sullivan then introduced Senate Bill 536 to turn just the library board over to the DOE, but it failed to clear the committee due to a lack of votes. Legislation to remove Arkansas Library Board passes in committee hearing SB640 was introduced by Sen. Jonathan Dismang (R-Searcy). It passed the Senate and committee hearings the day after it was introduced. It is moving quickly through the House and is currently before the House State Agencies & Governmental Affairs Committee. The legislature is due to dismiss this Wednesday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Arkansas Senate approves State Library Board overhaul after dissolution bill fails
Sen. Jonathan Dismang (left), R-Searcy, watches the Senate vote on SB 640, which would remove the seven members of the Arkansas State Library Board and allow the governor to replace them, on Thursday, April 10, 2025. Sen. Dan Sullivan (right), R-Jonesboro, sponsored a bill to abolish the State Library and its board, but a House committee rejected it on April 9. Next to Sullivan is Sen. Matt Stone, R-Camden. (Tess Vrbin/Arkansas Advocate) Arkansas lawmakers are considering removing all seven members of the State Library Board and allowing Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders to replace them later this year. Sen. Jonathan Dismang, R-Searcy, filed the bill Wednesday night, less than two hours after a House committee rejected Senate Bill 536, a proposal to abolish both the State Library and its board and transfer their powers and responsibilities to the Arkansas Department of Education. Senate Bill 640 received initial committee approval Thursday morning and passed the full Senate in the afternoon. Bills usually are not heard by the full House or Senate until at least a day after passing committees, but the Senate suspended the rules Thursday to hear bills that had passed committee that morning. The seven-member State Library Board disburses state funds to public libraries on a quarterly basis. It has appeared 'fairly dysfunctional' at its recent meetings, so the Legislature should 'wipe the board clean,' Dismang told the Senate Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs. At a special meeting in March, the board rejected two motions with a 4-3 vote. They would have created nonbinding policies to protect children from 'sexually explicit' content in libraries and detached the State Library from the American Library Association. By the same split vote, the board passed a separate motion aimed at protecting children in libraries while honoring the First Amendment and library material selection standards. Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Jonesboro, filed SB 536 in response to the two failed motions, which he had asked the board to pass in order to ensure its survival. Sullivan has targeted the library board for its refusal to adopt policies directing public libraries to keep certain materials out of the hands of minors. Arkansas senator continues mission to eliminate State Library Board, cites unfulfilled bargain Dismang told the Advocate that Sullivan's requests were 'not extreme' and should not have been difficult for the board to accommodate, particularly the one regarding content accessible to minors. 'I don't think anyone's innocent in the way that those conversations are happening on that board,' he said. '…The tact both ways was not something that I was really impressed with, so starting over makes sense.' The three board members who supported Sullivan's requests were all Sanders appointees: former Republican state senator Jason Rapert, who moved to approve the requests; Shari Bales, whom the Senate confirmed alongside Rapert, and Sydney McKenzie, who joined the board in January and is married to Rogers Republican Rep. Brit McKenzie. SB 640 would require the seven new members to draw lots determining how their terms will be staggered, ending between one and seven years from when the bill becomes law. Subsequent appointees would serve seven-year terms, the current length of time board members serve. Sens. Bryan King, R-Green Forest, and Clarke Tucker, D-Little Rock, were the only Senate State Agencies committee members to oppose sending SB 640 to the Senate floor Thursday. Both voted against SB 536 on the floor last week, when the Senate passed the bill with 18 votes, the slimmest possible margin. King, Democratic Sen. Reginald Murdock of Marianna and GOP Sen. Ron Caldwell of Wynne did not vote on SB 640 Thursday afternoon. The Senate's 27 other Republicans voted for SB 640. The remaining five Senate Democrats, including Tucker, voted against the bill, though Sen. Fred Love, D-Mabelvale, was erroneously recorded as voting in favor. Tucker told the Senate last week that the Legislature has the authority to reconstitute the State Library Board instead of dissolving it if lawmakers are dissatisfied with it. He said Thursday in an interview that SB 640 'is the least harmful version of anything that we can do,' but he opposed the bill because he didn't believe reconstituting the board was necessary. The House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs, the same panel that rejected SB 536, will be next to hear SB 640. All six Senate Democrats and four Republicans, including King, voted against confirming Rapert to the State Library Board in December 2023. King and Tucker expressed concern during Thursday's committee meeting that Rapert might be reappointed if SB 640 becomes law. The bill does not preclude current members from reappointment. When asked via email Thursday whether he would seek reappointment, Rapert said his appointment to the board was Sanders' choice, not his, and he believes he has 'done the job' expected of him. 'I fight for what is right and will continue to do so in all arenas of government,' said Rapert, founder of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, a conservative group responsible for model legislation introduced in several statehouses nationwide, including bans on abortion and gender-affirming medical care. During his tenure on the board, Rapert has repeatedly sought to withhold state funds from libraries where 'sexually explicit' content is within children's reach. The board has consistently voted against this proposal, and Rapert has called for the dissolution of the board. He said he would have been satisfied with SB 536 becoming law but believed the passage of SB 640 would still be 'a blessing.' 'My hope is that new members on the board will allow for policies to be adopted to encourage our public libraries to ensure that children are protected from exposure to sexually explicit materials inappropriate for their age,' Rapert said. 'That has been my goal since day one… We would not be at this point if the members of that board had listened and taken positive action.' The State Library Board is scheduled to meet the second Friday in May and in August. If SB 640 becomes law, it will go into effect Aug. 1, and it gives Sanders 30 days to replace the board. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE Board Chairwoman Deborah Knox said in an interview that she was 'encouraged' that the State Library is no longer likely to be abolished but 'discouraged' that she might lose her position. The board will be more likely to endorse Rapert's efforts to detach from the American Library Association and to 'sequester books' based on appropriateness for minors if all seven members are Sanders appointees, Knox said. 'I do feel that the State Library Board is essential and the Arkansas State Library itself is essential,' Knox said. 'So any way that it can continue, I'm for [that] even if I'm not a part of it.' Earlier this year, Sullivan sponsored Senate Bill 184, which would have abolished both the State Library Board and the Arkansas Educational Television Commission, the panel that oversees Arkansas PBS. He and the commission chair said in March that they had reached an agreement that kept the PBS commission alive; Sanders appointed Sullivan's wife to the panel last year. SB 536 would have codified several new criteria for libraries to receive state funds, including minimum hours of operation per year and 'prohibit[ing] access to age-inappropriate materials to a person who is sixteen (16) years old or younger.' Dismang was one of three senators to vote present on SB 536. He told the Advocate Thursday that despite his concerns about the current board, he believed the State Library should continue to exist, partly because it oversees historical records that SB 536 would have transferred to the Department of Education. SB 640's House sponsor, Rep. Howard Beaty, R-Crossett, was among the bipartisan opposition to SB 536 during Wednesday's committee meeting. He said the conflict surrounding the State Library Board 'could have been resolved very easily' if people on both sides had not 'dug their heels in and decided they weren't going to negotiate.' Sullivan amended SB 536 Wednesday, meaning it would have had to receive Senate approval again before going to Sanders' desk. The Legislature will not meet Friday and plans to conclude the session next Wednesday, making it difficult for SB 536 to complete the legislative process if House State Agencies were to reconsider and pass the bill. The amendment to SB 536 removed a requirement for libraries' collections not to have any materials that state law considers 'harmful to minors' in order to receive state funding. Sullivan said he amended the bill 'at the request of librarians and community members.' One of those community members was Victoria Kelley of Yellville, she told the Advocate Thursday. She said SB 640 concerned her because she disagreed with dismissing 'entire boards without justifying the 'cause' for what individuals did wrong,' which continues 'a bad precedent' that began in her home of Marion County. In December, County Judge Jason Stumph and the county Quorum Court dismissed the local library's existing board members and later replaced them all in January. Stumph said the previous board failed to supervise Dana Scott, the director of the Yellville library who was dismissed and arrested Dec. 2 for alleged financial crimes. Marion County officials appoint new library board, accept interim library manager's resignation Staggered terms on the State Library Board are 'meant as a buffer to the kind of personal and partisan targeting we're seeing' so that one governor cannot 'overhaul' the body, Kelley said. Kristin Stuart of Little Rock told the Advocate she had similar frustrations. She sought to speak against SB 640 during Thursday's State Agencies committee meeting, but chairman Sen. Scott Flippo, R-Bull Shoals, denied her the opportunity because she had not signed up in advance. 'I think it's really just insane that they want to dismantle the board after the outright abolition [bill] failed,' Stuart said. 'It's a power grab. It's an attempt to politicize a body that's operated independently for decades without partisan interference.' Two good things about SB 640, Kelley said, are that the State Library will continue to exist and that new members will not make it easier for the board to 'upend the Constitution.' SB 536 had similarly 'fatal' language as Act 372 of 2023, Arkansas Library Association (ArLA) President-elect Adam Webb said Wednesday. A federal judge blocked portions of the Sullivan-sponsored law last year on First Amendment grounds, and the state is appealing the ruling. The ArLA is neutral on SB 640, Webb said Thursday. The blocked sections of Act 372 would have given local elected officials the final say over whether to relocate challenged library materials some consider 'obscene' and made librarians legally liable for disseminating such materials. Webb and ArLA are among 18 plaintiffs that challenged the law. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
