By Haleigh Smith

Book bans have far-reaching negative effects that threaten individual rights, educational integrity, and societal progress. They silence important voices and ideas, depriving students of stories that help them understand themselves and others—especially those about race, gender, or sexuality—thus erasing marginalized communities from the educational landscape.[1] Such bans undermine the fundamental right to read, a cornerstone of democracy, by restricting access to information and limiting the free exchange of ideas essential for personal growth.[2] Historically, censorship has been used as a tool of oppression—erasing dissent, hiding truths, and maintaining control—patterns that continue today through efforts to silence challenging or uncomfortable topics.[3] In education, particularly within school libraries, censorship hampers critical thinking and the ability to grapple with complex issues like mental health, social justice, and identity, impeding students’ development as independent thinkers.[4] Further these censorship efforts violate international human rights,  which protect the right to access diverse ideas and information worldwide, directly undermining global principles of free expression and cultural diversity.[5]

The Case That Started It All: Island Trees v. Pico

The origins of contemporary book bans can be traced back to landmark legal cases that set the stage for ongoing censorship debates. A pivotal moment was the 1982 Supreme Court case Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico.[6] In Pico, a school board removed books from its library because they disliked their ideas—calling them “anti-American,”[7] “anti-Christian,” and “filthy.”[8] The Supreme Court ruled that such political or ideological censorship was unconstitutional.[9] The Court affirmed that students have a right to access diverse ideas, even if those ideas are controversial or unpopular, and that censorship motivated by disagreement with content violates the First Amendment.[10] This decision sent a clear message: schools cannot suppress ideas just because they find them inconvenient or uncomfortable.[11]

The ruling protected the fundamental right to access a broad spectrum of information and ideas, especially within the educational context where students’ rights and parents’ concerns intersect.[12] It emphasized that education, particularly through school libraries, should remain a space for free thought and inquiry, safeguarding the ability of young minds to explore complex issues and develop critical thinking skills.[13]

The Irony of Banning Books for “Vulgarity” and the Paradox of Parental Monitoring

A common argument against certain books is that they contain “vulgar” language or sexual content and are therefore inappropriate.[14] But here’s the irony: many of these bans target books that depict real-life issues—mental health struggles, grief, sexual violence, or identity—topics that are often discussed openly in health classes, textbooks, and online media.[15] For example, some schools ban books because they contain words or themes related to sexuality or violence, yet those same schools might have health textbooks with explicit images or descriptions. How can they justify banning a novel with honest portrayals of adolescent experiences while allowing explicit images in a health class? The inconsistency reveals that these bans are less about protecting children and more about controlling the narrative.

The inconsistency in how society or certain institutions approach censorship—such as banning some books while allowing explicit content elsewhere—reveals an underlying motive. If the primary goal was genuinely to protect children from harmful or inappropriate material, then the standards and actions would be consistent across all platforms, including school curricula, textbooks, media, and online content.

However, the fact that many banned books contain honest portrayals of complex, real-life issues—like mental health struggles, sexuality, or violence—while other sources, such as health textbooks or online media, include explicit images or descriptions without similar bans, suggests otherwise. The selective nature of these bans indicates that the real aim is not solely about shielding children from harm.

Some may suggest that parents want control in what their children read and that certain books should be banned or monitored. That’s understandable; parents want to shield their children from harmful content. But here’s the catch: children have access to the internet and tablets that expose them to far more explicit, harmful, or misleading content than anything found in schoolbooks.[16] Social media platforms are filled with images, videos, and messages that are often far more age-inappropriate than the books targeted in censorship campaigns.

If parents are genuinely concerned about content, shouldn’t they also scrutinize what their children are exposed to online? This inconsistency underscores an important point: banning books in schools does not shield children from uncomfortable or mature topics. Instead, it pushes those conversations into secretive, unregulated spaces online where children may encounter even more harmful material without guidance or context.

Why Censorship Is Dangerous for Society

Book bans are not merely about restricting access to individual titles; they pose a fundamental threat to the principles of a free and democratic society.[17] Suppressing ideas hampers the development of critical thinking, moral reasoning, and empathy.[18] By banning books that challenge traditional power structures or reveal uncomfortable truths, authorities can manipulate public perception and marginalize voices that question the status quo.[19] Moreover, the practice fosters a culture of fear and conformity, discouraging open dialogue and curbing curiosity.[20] Ultimately, this undermines core principles of free expression and diversity, which are vital for societal progress and the protection of individual rights.

What Can We Do?

Understanding the importance of the right to read is the first step in safeguarding intellectual freedom. The Pico case underscores that local school boards may not remove books from libraries simply because they dislike the ideas contained within them.[21] Such actions violate students’ First Amendment rights and threaten the open exchange of ideas essential to education and democracy.[22] We must actively oppose censorship efforts and support librarians, educators, and organizations fighting to preserve access to diverse ideas. Advocating for transparent, fair policies around book selection and challenge processes is essential. Recognizing that exposure to complex topics, when handled appropriately, is a vital part of education helps foster an environment where open dialogue, critical thinking, and understanding can thrive—principles reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Pico.[23]

Conclusion

The fight over books is more than a debate about literature; it’s about the kind of society we want to be. Do we want a society that values free speech, diversity, and critical thinking, or do we accept a future where ideas are silenced, voices marginalized, and ignorance prevails? The landmark case Pico v. Island Trees reminds us that censorship motivated by disagreement with ideas is unconstitutional and unjust.[24] As we witness a wave of book bans today, it is more important than ever to stand up for the fundamental rights to read, think, and learn without fear or censorship. Protecting these rights is essential to preserving a free and open society.

[1] Morgan Gilbard, What You Need to Know About the Book Bans Sweeping the U.S., COLUM. UNIV. Tchr. Coll. (Sept. 6, 2023), https://www.tc.columbia.edu/articles/2023/september/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-book-bans-sweeping-the-us/.

[2]  Sarbina Baeta et al., The Normalization of Book Banning, PEN AMERICA, (Oct. 1, 2025) https://pen.org/report/the-normalization-of-book-banning/#heading-11.

[3] Banned Books About Black History, PEN AMERICA (Feb. 24, 2025), https://pen.org/banned-books-about-black-history/.

[4] See generally Bd. of Educ. v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 857 (1982).

[5] Censorship efforts, like banning books, directly contradict these principles by limiting individuals’ exposure to different perspectives, cultures, and beliefs. This restriction undermines efforts to promote free expression and cultural diversity worldwide, both of which are essential for fostering understanding, tolerance, and progress in an increasingly interconnected world. G.A. Res. 217 (III) A, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Dec. 10, 1948).

[6] 457 U.S. 853.

[7] Id. at 857.

[8] Id. at 859.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] Id.

[12] Id. at 869.

[13] Id.

[14] Baeta, supra note 2.

[15] Id.

[16] Caitlynn P. Stephens, The Online Behaviors Most Harmful to Kids’ Mental Health, According to a New Survey, EducationWeek (July 10, 2025), https://www.edweek.org/leadership/the-online-behaviors-most-harmful-to-kids-mental-health-according-to-a-new-survey/2025/07.

[17] Kate Taylor, Book Bans in the U.S. Are Rising at a Rapid Pace, Reports Find, N.Y. Times (Apr. 20, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/20/books/book-bans-united-states-free-speech.html.

[18] Julie Gorlewski, Censorship Obstructs Dialogue and Inhibits Critical Thinking, Learn Magazine, Fall 2023, at 7.   

[19] Taylor, supra note 17.

[20] Id.

[21] Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 872 (1982).

[22] Id.

[23] Id.

[24] Id. at 871.