Industry & Advocacy News

Authors Guild Federal Court Victory: Arkansas Book Ban Declared Unconstitutional

Book Banning Free Speech

January 10, 2025

• Share
• on Twitter (opens in a new tab)
• on Facebook (opens in a new tab)
• on Linkedin (opens in a new tab)
• via email

In a decisive victory for authors, readers, libraries, bookstores, and publishers, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas has declared Sections 1 and 5 of Arkansas Act 372 unconstitutional and permanently enjoined their enforcement.

This ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed on June 2, 2023, by a broad coalition that included the Authors Guild, local bookstores, library systems, publishers, and readers. The decision marks the culmination of a legal battle that began when the law was initially signed on March 30, 2023. It was blocked by a preliminary injunction in July 2023.

The law contained two particularly problematic provisions. The first (Section 1) would have subjected librarians and booksellers to criminal penalties for making certain books “available” to minors—which could only be avoided if they either removed books deemed unsuitable for the youngest minors from all their shelves or banned minors entirely from their premises. The second provision (Section 5) would have allowed any individual (the law did not even require the complainant to reside in Arkansas) to demand the removal of books they claimed were “inappropriate”—an undefined term not based on constitutional standards—which would then effectively permit local review boards to engage in viewpoint and content-based discrimination.

The court upheld its preliminary injunction and issued a summary judgment in the plaintiffs’ favor. In its ruling, the court emphasized the law’s fundamental constitutional flaws, stating: “If the General Assembly’s purpose in passing Section 1 was to protect younger minors from accessing inappropriate sexual content in libraries and bookstores, the law will only achieve that end at the expense of everyone else’s First Amendment rights. The law deputizes librarians and booksellers as the agents of censorship; when motivated by the fear of jail time, it is likely they will shelve only books fit for young children and segregate or discard the rest.” The court also held that the law’s vague language around terms like “appropriateness” failed to provide clear guidance for enforcement while forcing libraries and bookstores to either create restricted “adults only” sections or remove materials entirely. Furthermore, the law lacked adequate procedural safeguards and judicial review for removal decisions, effectively allowing viewpoint-based discrimination.

The Authors Guild, which has been fighting book-banning legislation nationwide, sees this ruling as a vital step in protecting both creative freedom and readers’ rights. These laws affect both authors’ ability to write about challenging subjects—because if authors are hindered in their ability to sell their books for fear they may be deemed “inappropriate”, they are likely to be discouraged against writing about challenging topics—and fundamentally restrict readers’ access to diverse perspectives and experiences.

The lawsuit was filed by a diverse group of plaintiffs which included, in addition to the Authors Guild, Pearl’s Books in Fayetteville and WordsWorth Books in Little Rock, as well as the American Booksellers Association, parents and students, local libraries and library associations, and the Association of American Publishers. The coalition demonstrated the wide-ranging impact the law would have had across the state’s literary ecosystem.

The plaintiffs’ legal team included John T. Adams of Fuqua Campbell, P.A., Michael Bamberger of Dentons, Bettina Brownstein of the ACLU of Arkansas, and Benjamin Seel and Will Bardwell of Democracy Forward.

In a joint statement, leaders of the plaintiff organizations celebrated the court’s decision: “Together with librarians, authors, publishers, booksellers, librarians everywhere, we applaud the Court’s carefully crafted decision upholding the constitutional right to access books.”

Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild, commented on the ruling’s significance: “This decision represents a crucial victory not just for authors’ right to write about difficult subjects, but for every reader’s freedom to access diverse perspectives and experiences. When we allow broad restrictions like Act 372, we don’t just silence authors – we deny readers, particularly young people, the opportunity to see themselves and understand others through literature.”