19-05-2025
Bill would give parents more say in removing what they call obscene, 'harmful' reading materials
A year after a similar proposal was rejected, the campaign to give parents more power when it comes to trying to ban any 'harmful' books and periodicals in public schools has cleared the New Hampshire Legislature.
Critics charge the legislation (HB 324) is a book ban that violates local control and will have a chilling effect on what librarians and teachers decide to introduce that could be considered sexually graphic, yet have significant literary value.
'Every student deserves the freedom to read and to see themselves reflected in the pages of their books, but this book ban infringes upon the right to read for Granite State youth and could criminalize New Hampshire teachers, librarians, and even school board members,' said Megan Tuttle, president of the National Education Association of New Hampshire. The association is the largest union representing public school educators as well as all public employees in the state.
State Sen. Tim Lang, R-Sanbornton, said the legislation is about transparency and consistency for how school boards treat complaints about material that a parent might view as obscene or harmful because it's not age appropriate.
'This bill doesn't ban a single book; it establishes a process where a parent sees material he or she views as harmful and can bring it to the attention of the local school board. If the board disagrees then, no, it's not removed,' Lang said.
The legislation now makes moves to the desk of Gov. Kelly Ayotte, who has yet to weigh in publicly on the matter.
The intent, supporters believe, is in keeping with Ayotte's insistence that parents get more of a say over what their children experience in public schools.
'This bill poses a significant threat to our children's access to diverse educational materials and places unnecessary pressure on our teachers—particularly during an ongoing teacher shortage,' said MacKenzie Nicholson, senior director of New Hampshire MomsRising, the group leading a local coalition opposed to it.
'We urge the Governor to veto HB 324, and we will continue to advocate on this issue until she does.'
Barrett Christina, executive director of the New Hampshire School Board Association, said local boards already have their own policies that deal with objectionable material.
'William Shakespeare's literature contains significant amounts of sexual references and innuendos and it would be nonsensical to disallow schools from using Shakespeare readings,' Christina told the Senate Education Committee during a recent hearing.
'If the bill's provisions were interpreted from an overly broad perspective, this bill could have this effect.'
Supporter: Shakespeare is OK
Sen. Daryl Abbas, R-Salem, said that's a deliberate misreading of the bill since it states no material may be removed that has 'serious literary, scientific, medical, artistic, or political value for minors.'
'I may not like all of Shakespeare, but none of it would be banned,' Abbas said.
'Now Hustler magazine? That is sort of what is being banned if the school board finds that it is harmful to minors.'
The Senate's final passage last week, on a party line 15-8 vote, marked a crowning achievement for its chief sponsor, Rep. Glenn Cordelli, R-Tuftonboro, who chairs the House Education Policy and Administration Committee.
Cordelli has long tried to end the exemption that public education has had from obscenity laws.
State prosecutors have told him should the legislation become law it's unlikely anyone will be criminally prosecuted.
'Books containing sexually explicit content have no space in New Hampshire schools,' Cordelli testified recently.
'The books offered in schools should be age-appropriate and further the educational experience of our youth.'
The issue crystalizes how elections have consequences.
The narrowly-divided House of Representatives last year voted 187-162 to kill a near identical bill (HB 1419).
Cordelli then had the embarrassment of the House voting to indefinitely postpone the topic.
That's a parliamentary death penalty of sorts that meant it couldn't come back to that chamber in any form until 2025 at the earliest.
Cordelli didn't suffer an avalanche of GOP defectors to his idea; only six House Republicans opposed it last year.
Thanks to the ballots cast by voters in all 400 House districts last November, House Republicans gained about two dozen seats.
That's why in March, Cordelli's bill passed the House 183-148 with just three GOP members against it, Reps. Joe Guthrie of Hampstead, David Nagel of Gilmanton and Brian Taylor of Freedom.
Rep. Manoj Chourasi, D-Nashua, was the lone House Democrat in support.
Katie DeAngelis said as a victim of sexual assault she suffered when she was 6, it was graphically-written books about this traumatizing experience befalling others that became one of the first ways she uncovered the severity of the crime committed against her.
Reading books as a child helped her heal, DeAngelis told the Senate education panel.
Kevin Gagnon of Salem said he found multiple books that were available, but to him, were unsuitable for children to read.
His protests got nowhere with the local school board, principal and superintendent, which brought him to a state Senate committee last month.
The entire episode led him to remove his child from public school, Gagnon said.
If signed, the law would take effect Jan. 1.
Then, all school districts by Nov. 1, 2026, must come up with a complaint resolution policy.
Within 10 days of any complaint, unless both parties agree to a different schedule, the principal must respond to the parent whether the material will be removed or remain.
Those unhappy with the decision can appeal it to the school board. If it is still not overturned, they can petition the state Board of Education.
The bill also gives the parent a legal cause of action to sue in civil court against a school or district and get legal fees and a $1,000 award for each violation if the parent prevails.
Senate Democratic Leader Rebecca Perkins Kwoka of Portsmouth tried to get added to the bill a provision that the school district get legal fees paid if it wins that lawsuit; the Senate rejected that by an identical 15-8 partisan vote with all GOP senators in opposition.
Gilles Bissonette, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire, said since 1976 the state has had a prohibition against minors getting harmful materials, but said the legislation goes way beyond that standard and would be unconstitutional.
The bill's restriction on all materials containing 'nudity and sexual arousal' was too expansive, he said.
Sen. Debra Altschiller, D-Stratham, focused on how unpopular the policy appears to be.
She cited a University of New Hampshire Survey Center poll that found two-thirds of respondents disagreed with the state setting 'policy procedures for reading materials.'
Online, 39 signed up in the Senate in favor of the bill with 1,367 opposed.
Similarly in the House, there were 47 supporters and 1,355 opponents.
'This is a roadmap with all signs pointing to book bans,' Altschiller said.
Sen. Denise Ricciardi, R-Bedford, said all parents should rise and insist that sexually inappropriate material come off school library and classroom shelves.
'When you have 'Gender Queer' in a second grader's school and it's got pornographic drawings and parents read excerpts from it, that's a problem,' she added.
klandrigan@
