Alabama lawmakers advance bill that could lead to prosecution of librarians

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — Alabama lawmakers on Thursday proposed legislation that would allow librarians to be prosecuted under the state’s obscenity law for providing “harmful” material to minors, the latest in a wave of bills in Republican-led states targeting library content and -decisions.

The Alabama House of Representatives voted 72-28 in favor of the bill that now heads to the Alabama Senate. The legislation comes amid a growing number of book challenges — often targeting LGBTQ content — and efforts in a number of states to ban the reading of drag queen stories.

“This is an attempt to protect children. It is not a democratic bill. It’s not a Republican bill. It’s a bill to protect children,” Republican Rep. Arnold Mooney, the bill’s sponsor, said during the debate.

The Alabama bill eliminates the existing exception for public libraries in the state’s obscenity law. It also expands the definition of prohibited sexual conduct to include any “sexual or gender-oriented conduct” in K-12 public schools or public libraries that “exposes minors to persons dressed in sexually revealing, exaggerated or provocative clothing or costumes, or stripping, or engaging in obscene or lascivious dancing, presentations or activities.”

Under the process established in the bill, a librarian at a public library or public elementary school could face a misdemeanor charge if the librarian fails to remove material or cease conduct that violates the state’s obscenity law within seven days of receipt of a written complaint. of the public.

Opponents argued that the proposal would threaten librarians with criminal prosecution at the whim of community members who disagreed with their decisions about books and programs.

“This process will be manipulated and used to arrest librarians you don’t like, not because they’ve done anything criminal. It’s because you don’t agree with them,” Rep. Chris England, a Democrat from Tuscaloosa, said during the debate.

Craig Scott, president of the Alabama Library Association, said libraries have long-standing procedures for reviewing the appropriateness of content and for the public to appeal if they disagree with a decision.

“Why do they come to libraries or think they can run the place better than us as professionals,” Scott said in a telephone interview. He predicted the state will lose “lawsuit after lawsuit” if the bill becomes law.

A judge in July temporarily banned Arkansas from enforcing a similar law that would have allowed criminal charges against librarians and booksellers for providing “harmful” material to minors.

Scott, who started his career in 1977, said he had never seen anything like the current climate. He said the Gadsden Public Library, where he works, has seen one person — who eventually took on a role in library management — challenge 30 books. Most book challenges involve books with gender identity content. But it also includes a book about a boy who wants to become a ballet dancer, he said.

“We are there for the entire community. We have to be. We have some books here that are far right. On the far left we have a number of books. But the library is there for the entire community. We have to stay in the middle as best we can, and they want to push us all the way to the right,” Scott said.

Republican Rep. David Faulkner, who worked on a replacement version of the bill passed by the House of Representatives, disputed that the bill could have a broad impact. He said courts have long interpreted obscene material.

The law takes away the immunity that elementary schools and public libraries had under the obscenity law, but sets limits on when prosecutions can occur, Faulkner said.

“It will only be a criminal offence, and that can only happen if, after becoming aware of the material, they did nothing about it,” he said.

Rep. Neil Rafferty, a Birmingham Democrat, said he was concerned that the bill’s language would allow someone to “target and harass people who may be dressed up in a Halloween costume” or wearing summer clothes that are too revealing for someone finds.

“I feel like this is a violation of the First Amendment and could easily be abused,” he said.