You can buy it in a bookstore. You can order it online and have it delivered the next day. You can even get a digital copy right now. If, however, a taxpayer or a parent believes the content of a book is age-inappropriate and ought not be included in a library collection accessible to children, that’s book banning.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals disagrees. It is not only NOT a book ban, it doesn’t violate the First Amendment, either.
The First Amendment can’t be invoked to challenge a library’s decision “about which books to buy, which books to keep, or which books to remove,” the court held.
The government isn’t preventing you from accessing the content. If you want the book, go get it. As I’ve pointed out repeatedly, the majority of published titles throughout human history are not available at the library, and those are not considered banned. Take offense at sexually implicit or explicit content directed at children, and you’re a book banner.
“It is one thing to tell the government it cannot stop you from receiving a book,” the court said. “The First Amendment protects your right to do that.” “It is another thing for you to tell the government which books it must keep in the library. The First Amendment does not give you the right to demand that.”
…
The Constitution enshrines “negative liberties” … “freedom from, not freedom to,” he writes. The “plaintiffs have a First Amendment right to read books. They don’t have a First Amendment right to force a public library to provide them.” “It’s the First Amendment, not FOIA.”
…
“No one is banning (or burning) books,” the court said. “All Llano County has done here is what libraries have been doing for two centuries: decide which books they want in their collections. That is what it means to be a library—to make judgments about which books are worth reading and which are not, which ideas belong on the shelves and which do not.”
Boom! Right in the Left Wing McNuggets. Sorry, McNugget.
I doubt they have two among the lot of them. But that would explain why the Dems are spending 20 million dollars to learn how to talk to men. I’m not kidding.
These guys are going to spend $20 million trying to convince men to rejoin a party whose unofficial anthem is “Lola” — Girls will be boys, and boys will be girls / It’s a mixed-up, muddled-up, shook-up world — but don’t be shocked. This is, after all, the same party that last fall praised Gov. Jazz Hands for his “stereotypically masculine traits.”
The Democrats have guys like Walz, who is maybe one handful of confetti away from Rip Taylor. Republicans? Their top guy’s third wife is also his second supermodel. How are you gonna compete for the male vote like that?
By calling them book banners?
We hope you use this ammo accordingly in all the fashionable social spaces where the book ban narrative might raise its angry little left-wing face. After which you should ask,
“Why are You Obsessed with Children and Sex?”
