There will be no weekly link roundup today–a double roundup will land next week. Instead, this week’s Literary Activism post is dedicated to a report pulled together by the collaborative efforts of Kelly Jensen (Book Riot), Tasslyn Magnusson, Sarah Lamdan (American Library Association), Stephana Ferrell (Florida Freedom to Read Project), and Arielle Haughee (Freedom to Read Project), as well as dozens of right to read champions nationwide. This report reflects on five years of escalating book censorship, including challenges, opportunities, and successes. It does not cover prison censorship during this period; that will be addressed in a future piece.
***
“We Need To Tell The Story”: Literary Advocates Nationwide Reflect On Five Years of Relentless Attacks on the Freedom to ReadThis fall marks the start of year six of relentless book bans—that’s more than half a decade. While the movement has shifted since its start, there is little question that we’re in for several more years of tireless advocacy on behalf of the right of all people in this country to read and access diverse, inclusive library collections.
In early 2021, one year into a radically different way of living in America thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic, book bans began popping up with a regularity not seen in quite a long time. It started in the spring, continued to expand through the summer, and became a full-blown movement by the fall. Concerned individuals—a mix of those who were parents and those who were not–flooded school board meetings with a litany of now-familiar complaints over the “inappropriate” content in books for children and teenagers. Many earned a moment or two of viral fame in conservative media and on social media, encouraging others to speak up in their schools about the importance of “parental rights” regarding books.
Book bans were but the next step in a movement that saw a small subset of parents raising their voices at school board meetings, demanding their rights be honored over mask and vaccination requirements during a global pandemic. Many of these same people complained about the rights of trans youth in public schools, whether that was over their ability to use a bathroom or play interscholastic sports with the team that aligned with their gender. Books were but another tool by which a small, politically motivated contingent could demand that their voices—and their power and money—be the ones dictating who does and does not belong in public spaces. Books became a common ground for both the political extremists and the fringe groups seeking new ways to permit themselves distance from what defines the public and the responsibilities therein.
A September 2021 Fairfax, Virginia, school board meeting—where a public comment about the content of Gender Queer and Lawn Boy was performed, recorded, and widely shared on social media—is often cited as the moment when it became clear that the book banning trend was a full-blown, organized political movement.
From there, book censorship exploded. States across the country began seeing a rise in local-level book challenges and removals, with Florida and Texas leading the nation in their efforts to develop state legislation around the issue of books in schools. Simultaneously, partisan interests began demanding “educational choice,” pushing for state voucher programs that would funnel public tax money into private education. Now public schools were put in a position of standing up for the rights of all students while simultaneously recognizing that such a commitment to their mission could mean less funding—and more harm perpetuated on those with the greatest need.
It became increasingly clear in late 2021 and early 2022 that none of this was by accident. Highly connected and coordinated groups like No Left Turn in Education and Moms For Liberty, to name two, were being supported by well-funded right-wing institutions to deploy such censorious efforts on the ground while advocating for restrictive laws across the country. The 2022-2023 era of book bans brought extremist takeovers of school boards. By 2023, the noise had caught the attention of federal legislators, who held a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on book bans. Just months before the hearing, though, Illinois would begin to change the conversation by passing the first freedom-to-read/anti-book-ban bill in the country. Twelve more states would join that trend by mid-2026.
What began seemingly on the ground level with individual book titles only escalated. Books, libraries, library workers, and educators were seeing themselves subject to numerous attempts–successful and not–to state-level legislation. These laws included everything from requiring ratings on books before public schools could purchase them to year-long jail sentences for librarians whose collections contained books that some entity somewhere may deem “harmful for minors” (also known as librarian criminalization bills). Some of these laws are on the books today, such as Arkansas’s Act 372 and Iowa’s Senate File 496, Texas’s Senate Bills 12 and 13 and Florida’s House Bill 1467; others have failed to pass–though not failed to fuel similar legislation elsewhere.
Early attempts to develop partisan book rating and review systems, such as BookLooks by Moms for Liberty, have become more sophisticated—and sometimes pricey—endeavors. Censors eager to make a buck have turned the fear of lawsuits or funding cuts into an opportunity to champion their software or systems as solutions to the manufactured crisis. They’ve also contributed to and profited from the chilling effects in education and the raging quiet censorship happening in libraries nationwide.
The courts have played a significant role in shaping book bans, too. Literary advocates like Leila Green Little fought local book bans through the federal court system, seeking to take the case to the Supreme Court. While she and her fellow plaintiffs did not achieve the much-hoped-for success, their efforts highlighted the constitutional crisis at hand. The same unwelcome outcome awaited in Mahmoud v. Taylor, fundamentally altering what public schools could and could not teach in the classroom without explicit parental opt-outs. While all of this is about the restriction and outright removal of access to materials for young people, it’s also about the systematic erasure and eradication of anyone outside the narrow confines of white supremacist ideals. The most commonly banned books mirror the very people experiencing the most targeted personal and legislative attacks in this country: people of color, queer people, young people, and anyone of a marginalized gender. Other advocates pursuing literary justice through the court system include school librarians in South Carolina, as well as partnerships between authors, publishers, the American Civil Liberties Union, and ordinary taxpayers in Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Florida, and Utah.
While numerous lawsuits over state book banning bills make their way through the judicial system and numerous federal-level book ban bills simmer in both the House and Senate, there is much to appreciate as well. The Librarians, a documentary film about the targeted attacks and abuses of library workers since 2021, won a Primetime Emmy Award. The film, which saw screenings and discussion panels held across America in 2025 and 2026, led to a richer understanding of what was happening not in some faraway places, but right in the viewers’ backyards.
Librarians who saw their careers upended for standing up against censorship have also served as vital reminders of the need for advocacy. They’ve also seen successful court cases over wrongful termination–see Suzette Baker, Patty Hector, Rhea Young, Brooky Parks, and Terri Lesley. No one wants to be in this position, but every one of these librarians stood up for their patrons’ rights and the ethical obligations of their work. That is to be commended and to serve as a reminder that the work of librarianship is never easy. It’s gotten only more difficult in this moment of escalating censorship.
One of the most heartening things to come of this challenging decade so far, though, has been the dedication of ground-level advocates championing the right to read and their public democratic institutions. From coast to coast, from red state to blue state, from the formally organized to the scrappy, parents, students, and literary advocates of all stripes have come together to say enough is enough. They’re taking back their rights to fully funded, well-supported public schools and libraries. This includes not only holding those institutions accountable for banning books, but also ensuring that people in their communities know what’s happening, where it’s happening, and how they need to show up to speak out. Their advocacy is being seen and heard not only in America but across the globe.
And that’s exactly what we’re bringing here in this Five Year Report on Book Censorship in America. As with our 2025 Book Censorship Wrapped, which looked at last year’s trends in book bans, the Five Year Report aims to not only explore the trends and themes of book censorship in the 2020s. It also puts the voices of those on the ground at the forefront. What you’ll see here are the voices, stories, experiences, and insights of nearly [two dozen] groups working to support the freedom to read. They range from groups working at the national level, such as Authors Against Book Bans and Brooklyn Public Library’s Books Unbanned, to groups working on the local level, including Annie’s Foundation in Iowa, the Texas Freedom to Read Project, and so many more.
The Five Year Report is a collaborative project from the American Library Association’s Office of Intellectual Freedom, Book Riot, and the Florida Freedom to Read Project. But rather than share only our insights, the Five Year Report solicited input from countless groups in early to mid-2026. These groups included folks whose work has been more specific to prison censorship, too–and while you won’t find that insight in this report, stay tuned for a special report that will highlight the trends, insights, challenges, and opportunities for prison literary advocacy later this fall. What you will find here is an array of wins and challenges, roadblocks and opportunities, both through the rearview mirror of the last five years and in the driver’s seat for the next year or two or ten.
This is in no way a comprehensive picture of book censorship in the 2020s so far. There’s no way any report could ever do that, particularly as we understand the hurdles that make reporting and recording censorship a Herculean task–the loss of local media, the suppression and reimagining of factual information, and the pervasive nature of quiet/soft/internal censorship to name just three. But the insights here are robust, and they underscore the vital need for those who champion the right to read to show up in their own communities—it really makes a difference. It creates the kind of sustainable change that turns advocacy efforts into democratic infrastructure.
On The National LevelWhen we look at book censorship in the national landscape, definitive patterns emerge. Research from the American Library Association’s Office of Intellectual Freedom tracked 5,668 books banned from libraries and 920 restricted due to relocation or parental-permission requirements in 2025. This hits two new milestones: the highest number of titles censored in a single year, and the highest percentage of challenged books resulting in censorship since tracking began in 1990.
Dr. Emily Knox, Interim Dean and professor in the School of Information Sciences at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign—who testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee about book bans in 2023—also notes this increase in censorship.
“Book banning is much more visible across the country,” she said. Knox explained that the local nature of censorship efforts creates a complex landscape. “There’s not a systematic way to get all schools and libraries to update their policies at the same time. Each community is uniquely vulnerable.”
There are trends with the type of books being banned over these last five years. Marginalized identities are disproportionately being targeted. PEN America found that of the 4,235 titles challenged in 2025, 44% targeted characters or people of color and 39% represented the experiences of LGBTQ+ characters or people. There is also an increasing shift in censorship, expanding from fiction into nonfiction. These include histories, biographies, reference books, and science topics, removing access to factual resources for young people.
Arguably, the biggest national trend has been that censorship has morphed from being individually-driven to special interests and government actors. The American Library Association found that 92% of book challenges in 2025 were initiated by pressure groups, elected officials, administrators, boards, or other decision-makers, with fewer than 3% originating with parents.
State laws are also increasingly driving local censorship decisions. Laws have been enacted that require the use of book rating systems, establish criminal penalties for librarians, mandate statewide blanket removals, and create review mandates. The result is often anticipatory obedience or “soft censorship.” Titles disappear from shelves without going through any formal challenge process.
What looked like it began as local, grassroots efforts now leaves few questions when it comes to the ultimate goal of these political interest groups: federal laws that protect the partisan interests and doctrine of one group at the expense of the First Amendment rights of all nationwide. The Department of Defense banned nearly 600 titles from DoD Education Activity schools last year, while the Supreme Court ruled on one noteworthy case that impacts book censorship. In Mahmoud v. Taylor, parents objected on religious grounds to their children encountering LGBTQ+ books in class. The Court ruled in their favor, saying that the lack of an opt-out encroached on their religious freedom. This decision is being weaponized to target inclusive policies. In Little v. Llano County, an en blanc panel in the Fifth Circuit found that a public library’s decisions to remove contested books were not subject to First Amendment protections. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case, leaving the Fifth Circuit ruling in place, though the limitations of the ruling at the Fifth—that it was applicable to only three states—has not stopped other states from choosing to demand censorship, citing Little v. Llano County as justification.
There is more censorship legislation on the horizon. Among the slate of current federal bill proposals is H.R. 7661. H.R. 7661, which has passed through committee and could be heard by the full House, targets “sexually oriented material” for minors, using federal education funding as leverage to guarantee compliance with its restrictions.
“I think much more of the public is comfortable with censorship than we realize, and the current news climate makes breaking through with these stories nearly impossible,” says Maggie Tokuda-Hall, author of Love in the Library and founding member of Authors Against Book Bans, adds.
Advocates across the nation are continuing to support the freedom to read, no matter how much resistance they face. “The movement to resist censorship has gotten more organized, grassroots activists in different areas of the country have found more opportunities to talk to each other, and our side’s legislative advocacy has improved,” said Philomena Polefrone, who shared her insights while working as Associate Director of American Booksellers for Free Expression. “Stymying the 2025 bills in Florida and Texas would have been impossible without tactical improvements on the legislative side of things. Proactive freedom to read bills have also been able to pass that have shown the effectiveness of our messaging.”
The next five years will be crucial for the freedom to read, and advocates have no other choice but to continue to rise to the challenge. No one is coming to save democracy for us. It’s our responsibility to continue to do the work, build community and coalition, educate people about what’s at stake, and encourage advocacy and activism from every angle.
On The State LevelArkansas
What began in late 2022 as a local controversy over LGBTQ+ materials in Arkansas libraries quickly developed into a broader statewide effort to restrict library content and reshape state library policy. In an op-ed published this month, Senator Dan Sullivan acknowledged that the October 2022 petition to defund the Jonesboro library due a 2021 Pride display was the trigger for his subsequent anti-library actions. Soon after Jonesboro, the Crawford County board required LGBTQ+ books to be moved to a separate section, and in February of 2023, Director Deidre Grzymala resigned due to board pressure.
In March 2023, Sullivan introduced and passed Act 372, prompting lawsuits including Fayetteville v. Arkansas. Parents also sued Crawford County. In Saline County, their board fired Director Patty Hector in October 2023 after she refused to remove LGBTQ+ books. Meanwhile, Jason Rapert joined the Arkansas State Library Board in December of 2023 and began pushing content restrictions as a condition of state funding. Lawsuits and funding disputes continued, and Act 372 was enjoined in December 2024.
In 2025, Sullivan unsuccessfully attempted to dismantle the Arkansas State Library, while Act 917 imposed new restrictions on certain materials in school libraries. A newly constituted State Library Board began rewriting state-aid rules in March of 2026, incorporating sweeping content restrictions. Although board members stated they did not intend to exclude minors from materials with “artistic and educational importance,” the draft rules would place any material containing a “description or image of human genitalia” in an adult section—far broader than the “books with images on the cover” they said they were targeting.
As another public-comment deadline approaches on September 29, 2026, the rules remain contested, while local libraries continue responding to the effects of Act 372 and related policies.
While the actions in Arkansas seem unrelenting, there are some sparks of light in this story. In August this year, Saline County settled with Patty Hector for $275,000. And after Ashley Burris, Director of the Lawrence County Library, made seemingly innocuous comments on Act 372, Dan Sullivan called her county judge demanding she be fired. She wasn’t.
For the librarians and advocates leading the Arkansas Right to Read Project, these moments matter. They are proof that speaking up can have an impact, and that the people fighting censorship are not powerless. The fight is far from over, but neither is the resistance. Every voice raised against these efforts is another spark of light keeping Arkansas from going dark.
Florida
Florida was among the first states to experience the coordinated wave of school censorship that started in 2021. The parents behind the Florida Freedom to Read Project saw firsthand how quickly it could move from a staged local controversy to systemic policy. After a 2021 orchestrated school board meeting spectacle over a graphic novel, public school par