Brittani Brooks isn’t worried she might lose her job, unlike many of her peers.

The Pulaski Heights Middle School librarian works in the Little Rock School District, which hasn’t seen the backlash that other areas of the state have against books depicting a diverse set of human experiences, so she publicly opposed a law that would change how libraries handle materials some consider inappropriate.

Other school librarians don’t have the same sense of security. The Arkansas Advocate reached out to several in different parts of the state and received few responses. Those that did respond declined to speak publicly due to fear of retaliation.

School librarians’ anxieties come from recent state laws governing the availability of books and the sharing of ideas in schools: Act 372 of 2023, the bill Brooks spoke against twice, and the Arkansas LEARNS Act, a wide-ranging education overhaul championed by Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

“I think the unspoken intention [of the law and its supporters] was more about fear, miscommunication and self-censorship, and I think they’ve achieved that, and it’s only going to get worse in schools,” Brooks said.

Act 372 would create criminal liability for librarians who distribute content that some consider “obscene” or “harmful to minors” — two terms that the law does not define — and put the availability of challenged books in the hands of elected officials.

In July, a federal judge blocked the portions of Act 372 pertaining to criminal liability and city or county elected officials’ authority over books in response to a lawsuit from 18 plaintiffs.

But the section of the law giving school boards the power to handle appeals for challenged school library books wasn’t enjoined and went into effect Aug. 1.

Additionally, the LEARNS Act prohibits “indoctrination” of children in schools but does not define the term. Those who oppose “indoctrination” in libraries and classrooms often cite LGBTQ+ topics and systemic racism as the information they do not want children to have.

As a result, some school libraries and districts have become “very strict about how books are chosen and how books are ordered,” trying to preemptively avoid accusations or legal trouble, Brooks said.

In districts where the debate over library content is especially charged, some librarians have found themselves wondering whether they can trust their colleagues after the idea that librarians are harming children has permeated their professional environments.

Hendrix College Library Director Britt Murphy works closely with K-12 librarians throughout the state and said she is aware of the self-censorship and fear affecting their jobs.

“Even when there aren’t laws to restrict our First Amendment rights, or even when we’re questioning them and they might be thrown out, unfortunately [public sentiment] has already done its dirty work because of the fear factor among librarians,” Murphy said. “It’s a real shame.”

‘Interference’

Act 372 requires school principals to select “a committee of licensed personnel,” which can include the principal, to be the first to review library materials challenged on the basis of “appropriateness.”

If the committee chooses to keep the book available to children, challengers can appeal the decision to the school board, which will then decide whether the book should remain in place or be relocated somewhere that minors cannot access.

Tess Vrbin/Arkansas Advocate

All school and public libraries already had procedures in place to handle book challenges before Act 372 was introduced this year. Brooks reminded the House Judiciary Committee that school libraries must have content reconsideration policies in order to be accredited by the state Department of Education.

She also said school librarians across Arkansas were removing books from shelves “behind closed doors,” since other states have also passed policies limiting what topics can be shared or discussed in schools.

Florida is one of those states. Books challenged or removed from shelves in Florida have frequently been by or about racial minorities, including civil rights activist Rosa Parks. The state also passed a law, known as “don’t say gay,” prohibiting the discussion of sexual orientation in K-12 classrooms.

Arkansans who spoke against Act 372 while it was moving through the Legislature expressed concerns that influxes of book challenges under the new law would create an undue burden on school and public librarians.

This adds to librarians’ anxieties about Act 372, since they already had “a really effective policy procedure” for book challenges, Murphy said. She called the new policy “overkill” and “interference with what librarians do,” especially since librarians are “rule-followers with strong feelings about the First Amendment.”

“I don’t think there was a lot of understanding or thought put into the practicalities of how imposing this new procedure on librarians would take place,” Murphy said.

Implementation and restriction

Public opposition to LGBTQ+ books in Arkansas schools predates both Act 372 and the LEARNS Act, though it varies by district and region.

The Conway school board removed two LGBTQ+ books from school libraries in October 2022. At the same meeting, the board approved a policy requiring transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms according to their gender assigned at birth.

Meanwhile in Northwest Arkansas, the Farmington school board restricted two books to readers age 17 and older in March after a parent voiced concerns. The school librarian, principal and three teachers formed a committee to handle the book challenges, and after the committee voted to retain the books, the school board overrode the decision, according to the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette and documents received via a public records request.

The process played out similarly to the one outlined in Act 372, which had not yet passed the Legislature at the time.

Sanders signed the law March 31, and the Arkansas Department of Education has since provided schools with some instructions on how to comply with Act 372.

Former Fayetteville High School Librarian Cassandra Barnett, who now works for ADE, supervised the Act 372 training. Barnett and two other school librarians wrote a letter to the Fayetteville school board in 2005, defending their jobs and their libraries against public accusations of misconduct by having books on the shelves that depicted sexual content and LGBTQ+ people.

Librarians said they needed the state’s input on the law to put their minds at ease, due to the since-blocked criminal liability portion of Act 372.

Act 372 information for school libraries (Source: Arkansas Department of Education via Freedom of Information Act request)

Barnett told librarians they would have to relocate books to where minors cannot reach them if school boards say so. This would mean only school faculty, staff and 18-year-old high school seniors would have access to relocated books.

In response to questions about the implementation of Act 372, ADE spokeswoman Kimberly Mundell said it is up to each district to determine compliance in its policies and selections of library materials.

“We encourage districts to read the law and consult with their legal counsel if they have any questions, as it is essential that the law be upheld,” Mundell said. “Parents have the right to know what information and materials their children have access to at school, and transparency on the local level is important.”

Vague policy ‘by design’

The lawsuit against Act 372 will go to trial in October 2024, but the unchallenged sections of the law are likely to remain up to interpretation regardless of whether U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks declares the challenged sections unconstitutional.

The judge wrote in his 49-page ruling that the “lack of clarity seems to have been by design” in the blocked portion of Act 372 giving city or county elected officials the power to relocate library books.

“By keeping the pivotal terms vague, local governing bodies have greater flexibility to assess a given challenge however they please rather than how the Constitution dictates,” he wrote.

The language in the section pertaining to school boards is nearly identical.

At the start of the 2023 school year, the Pulaski County Special School District cut students’ access to the Central Arkansas Library System’s online educational materials program, citing the lack of a “filter” in the database and seeking “more clarity as to what’s acceptable and what’s not” under Act 372, district spokeswoman Jessica Duff said.

PCSSD will reinstate access to the program in January with the condition of parental permission, the district announced earlier this month.

Regarding the books available at PCSSD libraries, Duff said the district and its librarians “do not have any concerns” about job security and “continue to stock their libraries with content that best suits the needs of their students.”

Brooks, the Pulaski Heights Middle School librarian, said she is confident that none of the books in her library run afoul of the undefined terms in Act 372 and the LEARNS Act.

“One thing I always tell people is, ‘We know we don’t indoctrinate kids. We don’t,’” she said. “…I’m not going to go around proving that I don’t. They would have to prove that I do.”

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com. Follow Arkansas Advocate on Facebook and Twitter.