3 Ways to Stand Up for Free Speech and Libraries
April 4, 2025
Another Victory for Authors: Federal Court Orders Books Back on Shelves in Colorado While District Attempts Delays
April 2, 2025
The Authors Guild is pleased to announce a significant victory in our fight against book censorship. On March 19, Federal Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney granted our motion for a preliminary injunction in our lawsuit against the Elizabeth School District in Colorado. The court has ordered the district to “immediately return the books to the library shelves” and has “enjoined [the district] from any conduct that violates this order.”
In her 45-page ruling, Judge Sweeney found that the Elizabeth School District violated the First Amendment rights of students, parents, and authors when it permanently removed 19 diverse books from school libraries.
Case Background
In August 2024, the Elizabeth School District Board of Education identified and removed 19 books from school libraries that it claimed were “too sensitive.” These books, which include titles such as The Hate U Give, The Bluest Eye, The Kite Runner, #Pride: Championing LGBTQ Rights, and several works by Ellen Hopkins, had been in district libraries for years.
The Authors Guild, along with parents Kristen Crookshanks and Mindy Smith (on behalf of their minor children) and the NAACP Colorado-Montana-Wyoming State Area Conferences, filed a lawsuit challenging these removals. We are seeking the immediate return of these books to library shelves and an end to viewpoint-based censorship in school libraries.
Court’s Findings on First Amendment Violations
The court’s detailed ruling revealed compelling evidence of viewpoint discrimination by the school board. Judge Sweeney cited numerous emails and statements from board directors that demonstrated their true motivations:
- Board Vice President Heather Booth wrote that “our commitment to conservative values was a key aspect of our campaign” and that “conservative values are exactly what we are and plan to continue to bring into the district.”
- Board Secretary Mary Powell initially voted to keep some books available while marking them as “sensitive,” noting that “#Pride is largely a history of LGBTQ, and doesn’t totally try to indoctrinate” and that keeping it would “be a good thing to show some openness to other viewpoints.” However, after pressure from other board members, she changed her vote to remove these books entirely.
- Another board member stated that “LGBTQ is only regarding sexual preference which doesn’t belong in any school” and that “constituents will not be happy about us returning any of these books.”
Judge Sweeney concluded that the “District’s decisive factor in voting to permanently banish the removed books was because the District disagreed with the views expressed in the books and to further their preferred political orthodoxy.”
District’s Delay Tactics to Avoid Returning Books
Despite the clear court order, the Elizabeth School District is now employing procedural delay tactics to keep these diverse books away from students for as long as possible. Rather than simply appealing the decision, the district has filed two motions:
- A “Motion to Stay” with the District Court, asking the judge to pause implementation of the order while they appeal the decision (meaning the books would stay off the shelves until the appeal has been decided); and
- An “Emergency Motion for Administrative Stay” with the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals
In response, the District Court has granted a temporary stay of its preliminary injunction, meaning the books can remain off the shelves while both parties present arguments about whether a longer stay should be granted during the appeal process. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has denied the school district’s emergency motion, deferring to the District Court’s temporary stay and ongoing proceedings.
These actions represent a troubling pattern we’re seeing nationwide: When faced with legal challenges to book bans, officials often employ every procedural tool available to keep books off shelves while the legal process unfolds—effectively achieving censorship regardless of the ultimate legal outcome.
Our Response to These Obstruction Tactics
Our legal team filed a strong response to the district’s motion on March 28. Our arguments emphasize:
- The Court has already found that the removal of the books violates the First Amendment, including the First Amendment rights of authors;
- The school district will not be irreparably harmed by restoring the books to the shelves;
- The public interest argues against a stay: “The preservation of First Amendment rights serves everyone’s best interest.”
We believe these further delays serve no legitimate educational purpose and only deprive students of access to valuable literature. Every day these books remain off shelves represents a continuation of the censorship we’re fighting against.
Judge Sweeney noted that “the loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury” and that the district’s actions were causing ongoing harm to students, parents, and authors.
Next Steps
After considering our response, the district court will rule on the school district’s motion for a stay pending appeal. According to the court’s order, the books will remain off shelves for at least 48 hours after this ruling.
We will continue to keep you updated as this case progresses. These legal battles often involve many procedural steps, but each one is important in our ongoing fight against censorship.
Support Our Work
This case is just one of many book-banning battles the Authors Guild is fighting across the country. Read more about our nationwide efforts to combat book bans and censorship.
Support Our Work
Your gift will help sustain our efforts to support working writers and preserve the literary profession.
Donate Now