Beginning in 2022 a new wave of hostility to freedom of thought and inquiry erupted throughout the country, including in Michigan, as right-wing organizations and parents intensified efforts to ban books and materials they disfavored from public libraries and public schools. Many of the books targeted are those that feature LGBTQ+ characters and themes, as well as issues involving race, poverty, disadvantage, and difference. In November 2022 the ACLU of Michigan sent a letter to superintendents and school board presidents throughout the state, warning that banning books from school libraries based on the ideas expressed in those books would violate the First Amendment, and urging all educators to take a stand in favor of inclusivity, openness, and free inquiry for our youth. In March 2023 a controversy erupted in Lapeer regarding the availability of the award-winning book, Gender Queer: A Memoir, in that town’s public library; most troubling were public statements by the county prosecutor suggesting that he would consider bringing criminal charges against the librarian if the book was not removed. The librarian retained us as her criminal defense attorneys, and we wrote the prosecutor a letter condemning his statements and warning him that any effort to take action against the librarian would violate the First Amendment. Fortunately, in May 2023 the library’s board of directors voted unanimously to keep the book in its collection, and the prosecutor took no action.
Meanwhile, in June 2023 we wrote to the Forest Hills Public Schools condemning the superintendent’s unilateral removal of books from the school library based on parents’ complaints, and also urging the school district to reverse a decision to remove books from the first-grade curriculum that included a fictional character who was being raised by two moms. Although the library books were returned to the shelves, the curriculum decision has not been reversed. (ACLU attorneys Jay Kaplan and Dan Korobkin; Cooperating Attorneys John Shea and Charissa Huang.)
In February 2025, the President of the Cromaine Public Library in Hartland, announced that he was working with the local Sheriff’s office to develop a labeling system of books that would state that a book contained sexually explicit content and that adults could be criminally prosecuted if they exposed a minor to the particular book. This announcement was prompted by a patron who had requested 200 titles be removed from the library- a large majority of which featured LGBTQ characters. After receiving pushback from the community, the Library Board then considered a proposal that would give them authority to override decisions made by the librarian regarding labeling books. Given the previous statements made by the Board President, in May 2025 we sent a letter to the Library Board, expressing concerns regarding using labeling as a form of censorship of LGBTQ related books and materials. The Board then adopted a policy that permits the Board to consult with the librarian regarding labeling, but the librarian still has ultimate authority. (ACLU Staff Attorneys, Jay Kaplan and Bonsitu Kitaba-Gaviglio).
In March 2025 we sent a letter to the Traverse Area District Library Board in response to a request they received from a community member to have access restricted to the acclaimed children’s book “Granddad’s Pride,” due to the fact that it features gay characters. The Board was considering moving the book from the youth to the adult section of the library to limit access. Our letter disapproved of this move based on the content of the book because it could be unconstitutional censorship. In response to our letter, the Board rejected the book challenge and “Granddad’s Pride” remains in the youth section of the library. (Staff Attorney Syeda Davidson and Cooperating Attorney Michael Naughton).
In April 2025 we sent a letter to the Alpena School Board, which was considering a policy that would permit parents objecting to library and instructional materials, to bypass the procedure by which a review committee considers their objections and go directly to the superintendent to render a decision regarding the removal of such materials. Our letter addressed First Amendment concerns as well as the need to have an open and transparent process. In response, the District agreed to maintain its current policy of having a review committee. (Staff Attorneys Syeda Davidson, Jay Kaplan, and Bonsitu Kitaba-Gaviglio).
