By Jonathan Allen and Hannah Beier
DOYLESTOWN, Pennsylvania (Reuters) – On May 12, the library coordinator for Pennsylvania’s Central Bucks School District sent an email to colleagues that some conservative parents and Christian advocacy groups had long prayed to see.
The email instructed school library staff to remove all copies of two books within 24 hours: “Gender Queer”, a graphic memoir by Maia Kobabe that includes cartoons of sexual encounters; and “This Book is Gay” by Juno Dawson, a guidebook with illustrations intended for LGBT students who feel overlooked by standard sex education curriculums.
They were being removed under a new book-challenge policy enacted last July by the Republican majority on the school district’s board of directors after a series of grueling public meetings that have divided the wealthy district north of Philadelphia. Under the policy, a parent can challenge a book in a school library if it depicts implied or actual nudity or “sexual acts” and a committee of district staff then reviews it.
Pulling the two books, both reviled by conservatives around the country, was another hyper-local victory in a broader national effort nurtured by Christian conservative groups to expand parents’ direct control over what school staff can share with their children, particularly on matters of sex, identity and race. Liberal groups say the effort amounts to censorship and even bigotry, with disproportionate harm to LGBT students and those in other minority groups.
Similar battles have unfolded across the country since the COVID-19 pandemic’s mask mandates and school closures turned school boards into some of the most fiery crucibles of U.S. political debate.
“What Bucks County has become is really this microcosm of the division that we see across the country, where people on both sides are so sure that they’re right,” said Tabitha Dell’Angelo, one of the three Democrats on the school board who voted against the policy.
According to two people involved in the drafting of Policy 109.2, it was written with advice and legal counsel from Christian non-profit organizations allied with the influential national group the Family Research Council, which advocates for religious freedoms and against LGBT rights.
Dana Hunter, a Republican and the chair of the school board, said she sought advice from Jeremy Samek, senior counsel at the Independence Law Center and the Pennsylvania Family Institute. Because Samek’s groups offered legal counsel on Policy 109.2 on a pro bono basis, Hunter said, she was under no obligation to inform other board members that she was working with him.
Two board members said they and the other Democrat on the board were not aware of the extent of those groups’ involvement until they were informed by Reuters.
Video of a board meeting shows that when Dell’Angelo repeatedly asked who wrote the book policy ahead of the vote, the Republican members refused to say. Republicans have a majority of six to three on the board.
A few months after passing Policy 109.2, the board’s Republicans passed another policy in January requiring teachers to appear neutral on “partisan, political, or social policy matters.” It codified and broadened an earlier instruction from the district’s school superintendent that teachers take down any rainbow pride flags displayed in classrooms, saying they had become “a flashpoint for controversy and divisiveness.”
Hunter and Samek said they worked together on drafting that policy, too.
LITERARY MERIT
A loose network of local conservative parents were vocal advocates of the book-challenge policy at the school board’s monthly meetings, standing at the microphone during public comment to read aloud the most sexually explicit passages from books they objected to.
A first draft of the policy, written in early 2022 by district library staff and modeled on guidance from the American Association of School Librarians, stated that staff must consider the “literary merit” of a book in deciding to acquire or keep it.
The rewritten policy that passed in July omitted the “literary merit” requirement, and allowed parents to seek the removal of books from the district’s school libraries if they contain actual or implied depictions of “sexual acts” or nudity.
“It’s a very reasonable policy,” said board chair Hunter.
The book-challenge policy became part of a broader complaint by the families of LGBT students in Central Bucks of a “hostile educational environment,” compiled by the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania. The complaint has triggered an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights; the district has spent about $1 million on legal fees defending itself, according to board members.
In an interview, Samek of the Pennsylvania Family Institute said his work included making sure the policies were “viewpoint-neutral” in order to comply with the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.
“There are things that everybody would agree, including the ACLU, that you shouldn’t be giving to kids,” said Samek, who does not live in the school district.
The Pennsylvania Family Institute is listed by the Family Research Council as one of its 49 “State Family Policy Councils.” The groups are all part of a national network of Christian groups that oppose abortion, same-sex marriage, and gender-affirming medical care for transgender people.
Hunter said she was not aware of those positions, but thought them irrelevant.
“What does that stance have anything to do with age-appropriate material for libraries? It doesn’t,” she said.
In November, Samek shared with Hunter and the district superintendent a draft of a policy that would prevent transgender students playing on school sports teams of the gender other than the one they were assigned at birth, according to emails obtained under Pennsylvania’s freedom of information law. The policy proposal is yet to be presented to the full board.
Dell’Angelo, one of the board’s Democrats, said it was wrong to involve groups that oppose LGBT rights in public school policy, and unethical to do so in secret.
“I absolutely see why people are alarmed,” she said. “They say ‘We’re not against gay kids,’ but then you’re soliciting advice from this group? It doesn’t match up. Now you’re telling on yourself. Now we see how you really think.”
Parents, teachers and students who opposed the book-challenge efforts said the excerpts read aloud at board meetings were taken out of context, ignoring the books’ larger values.
“Some books do contain depictions of sex, but I think that’s just an accurate portrayal of teenagers and adults,” said Leo Burchell, an 18-year-old transgender student who graduated this month from a district high school. “Banning those books that are about sex or about nudity or about rape is not going to stop it from happening.”
Earlier this year, Shannon Harris, a mother of two district students, and another parent filed challenges with the district to about 60 books they viewed as having inappropriate sexual content. A third of the books feature LGBT characters or topics while two thirds do not, which Harris said belied opponents’ “false narrative” of homophobic or transphobic motives behind the policy. Those books are pending review.
Besides the two books removed in May, three other books, including two with LGBT themes, have been reviewed by committees of district staff, who voted to keep them on high-school library shelves.
Harris’s advocacy had cost her many friends, she said, but she had no regrets.
“I am a Christian,” she said, “and what I believe is that what I should be doing is advocating for the good of everybody, because that’s what God would want.”
(Reporting by Jonathan Allen and Hannah Beier; editing by Paul Thomasch and Claudia Parsons)