AG in Action
May 1, 2026
On Monday, April 27, the Authors Guild and a broad coalition of authors, booksellers, publishers, librarians, educators, students, and civil liberties advocates gathered in Albany for a day of direct legislative action, meeting with state senators and assembly members to urge passage of two bills that would protect access to books in New York’s schools and public libraries: the Freedom to Read Act (S.8630-A / A.9537-A) and the Open Shelves Act (S.1100-A / A.3119-B).
The day included a noon press conference at the Capitol, where acclaimed author Jacqueline Woodson; Nanette Vonnegut, daughter of Kurt Vonnegut and an artist and writer in her own right; and Nick Bruel, author of the beloved Bad Kitty series, made the case for why New York must act now. Their words were a reminder that this fight is not abstract: It is about which children get to see themselves in books, which authors get to make a living, and which communities get to decide what their libraries hold.
One of the most striking moments of the day came when advocates noted that the legal pushback against book bans did not begin in Texas or Florida. It began on Long Island. In the 1970s and early 1980s, the Island Trees Union Free School District removed nine books from its school libraries, including Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut, citing the books’ language and content. The case was litigated all the way to the Supreme Court, which held in Board of Education v. Pico (1982) that books cannot be removed from school libraries on the basis of ideological disapproval or because of the identities of the authors or characters depicted.
Nanette Vonnegut, who joined advocates at the Capitol, spoke about what it meant to stand in Albany in that history’s shadow. Her father, she recalled, attended public school in Indiana, where teachers never suggested there were books he shouldn’t read. “He called these public servants saints,” she said. “That was the rich soil in which his imagination grew—that was the American promise, and the America he actually fought for.”
By the time Vonnegut was 20, book-burning fires were raging in Nazi Germany, and he joined the U.S. Army to fight that regime. Decades later, when a North Dakota school district burned more than thirty copies of Slaughterhouse-Five in a furnace beneath the cafeteria, Vonnegut wrote an indignant letter to the school board asking to be acknowledged as a real human being—a World War II veteran who needed to make a living writing books. Before writing the letter, he called the district and asked: “Is this even legal?”
“That my father had to ask that question breaks my heart,” Nanette Vonnegut said. “The burning stopped in North Dakota because of public outrage. I believe my father thought that would be the end of it.”
It wasn’t. In March 2024, a community member in Staten Island discovered hundreds of books discarded in garbage boxes at P.S. 55, the Henry M. Boehm School, books that had been part of a 2019 diversity initiative. Handwritten notes justified their removal with comments like “boy questions gender,” “our country has no room and it’s not fair” (written on a book about immigration), and “teenage girls having a crush on another girl in class.” No formal challenge process had been followed. As Publishers Weekly reported at the time, the NYC Department of Education opened an investigation, and major publishers condemned the removals as unlawful censorship.
Nick Bruel, whose Bad Kitty series ranked 37th on the American Library Association’s list of the 100 most banned and challenged books of the decade from 2010 to 2019 (ahead of Lolita, which came in at 73), offered a wry and pointed account of what it’s like to be a banned children’s book author. Much of the objection to his work centers on a single stanza in Bad Kitty for President, in which a character’s family includes someone’s “partner.” That word, he said, sent people into a tailspin. He read aloud from an actual letter from a reader who stated she intended to purchase and burn the book. His response was unequivocal. “Do I edit myself to appease people who might burn a book? Or do I write a book that could speak to that kid out there who actually has two moms? That kid won. Because like it or not, that kid exists—and those kids deserve to see their world represented in a mainstream book as much as any other kid.”
Jacqueline Woodson put the pattern in its broader context. “There is a disproportionate number of books by Black and Brown folks, by folks in the LGBTQ+ community, that are being challenged in our schools and libraries,” she said. “And this is not by accident. This is by design.” She invoked scholar Rudine Sims Bishop’s framework of mirrors and windows in literature—mirrors so that children see reflections of themselves, windows so that they can see into lives unlike their own. “When kids don’t have that, they struggle with developing empathy. When they don’t have literature that affirms their lives, they don’t see a future where they can grow up and tell their own stories. Let’s not let this country go backwards.”
Four advocacy teams—drawn from the Authors Guild, the American Booksellers Association, PEN America, the NYCLU, Lee & Low Books, Penguin Random House, Equality New York, Students Against Book Bans, Authors Against Book Bans, and the school library community—spent the day moving between offices in the Legislative Office Building and the Capitol, meeting with Senators Joseph Addabbo Jr., Michaelle C. Bynoe, Kevin Thomas Sutton, John C. Liu, Robert Jackson, Shelley B. Mayer, Michael Gianaris, José M. Serrano, Christopher Bottcher, and Andrew Zellner; Assembly Members Larinda Hooks, Brian A. Wright, Jennifer Lunsford, Michaelle C. Solages, Michael Benedetto, and others.
Governor Kathy Hochul vetoed an earlier version of the Freedom to Read Act, citing concerns about confusing standards. The revised bill, introduced by Senator Rachel May in January 2026, addresses those concerns directly: It instructs the Commissioner of Education to develop clear regulations, explicitly writes into law that certified library media specialists have authority to manage collections, and strengthens documentation requirements for handling challenges, moving well beyond the informal guidance the governor had previously argued was sufficient.
During meetings with representatives, Authors Guild General Counsel Cheryl Davis pushed back on the persistent myth that controversy is good for sales. “That’s absolutely not true, especially when you’re dealing with books for children and younger audiences,” she said. Authors of banned books don’t just lose sales—they lose school visits and speaking engagements, which for many children’s and YA authors are a primary source of income. She described one author whose school visit was canceled not because of her own book, but because she had written another book that mentioned that snails are transgender—which, Davis noted, is scientifically accurate.
Suzanna Hermans of Oblong Books in the Hudson Valley brought a bookseller’s warning about what’s already happening quietly, before any formal ban takes effect. “I’m seeing my librarians, my teachers kind of self-censor. They are buying fewer books. The books look a little bit whiter. And that scares me—not because they don’t think the books are important, but because they’re afraid for their jobs.” She described a teacher friend who recently faced a book challenge and wasn’t scared for the first time. “He said, ‘I wasn’t scared, because we have a plan.’ When there’s a process, it becomes less personal. There are rules in place.”
Sarah LuAnn Perkins—an author, illustrator, and parent of two young children advocating with Authors Against Book Bans—spoke to both sides of the debate. As a creator with a book on submission, she has felt the economic pressure directly. “Publishers are really tightening their belts. My ability to support my children is directly affected.” But she was equally clear as a parent. “I believe I should be the one who helps my children manage their access to books. When people outside of the community come and decide to take books off the shelf, I, as their parent, am no longer able to guide them in that way. I want my kids to be able to access accurate information and I will talk to them about that. That is what a library is for.”
The day produced at least one concrete result on the spot. After the coalition’s visit, Senator Liu’s legislative director Aman Patel said: “When people are banning books, they’re telling everyone else, ‘You can’t read this.’ That’s not freedom.” Senator Liu joined both bills as a cosponsor following the meeting.
The Freedom to Read Act requires every district to have a written reconsideration policy, keeps materials on shelves during any review, prohibits removal based on ideological disapproval, and protects librarians and educators from retaliation. The Open Shelves Act establishes a statewide baseline for public libraries receiving state aid, affirming the authority of trained library professionals and requiring collections to reflect the full diversity of their communities.
Critically, neither bill restricts parental rights. Parents retain full authority over what their own children read. Neither eliminates local control. Neither prevents books from being challenged. They simply ensure challenges are handled through fair, transparent, professionally grounded processes, not unilateral removal, quiet pressure, or fear.
New York is a national leader in publishing, education, and free expression. As of early 2026, at least ten states—including Rhode Island, Illinois, California, Maryland, and Minnesota—have enacted Freedom to Read legislation. New York is not yet among them.
As Nanette Vonnegut said in Albany, her father thought the book burning in North Dakota would be the end of it. New York now has a chance to establish in law what the Supreme Court affirmed four decades ago in a case that began right here on Long Island: that no school board, no pressure campaign, and no single objection can determine what ideas an entire community is allowed to encounter.
If you live in New York, contact your state senator and assembly member and urge them to support the Freedom to Read Act (S.8630-A / A.9537-A) and the Open Shelves Act (S.1100-A / A.3119-B).
