banning books argumentative essay topics

The University of Chicago Library News

Taking a stand against book bans

The University of Chicago was founded over 130 years ago based on the belief that knowledge creates a better world and enhances our lives. This is what our Latin motto states. We also believe that learning and creating knowledge require the freedom to explore, to discuss and to share views and ideas, even if it makes us uncomfortable at times. A discourse that allows for disagreement and where divergent perspectives are heard makes us all stronger, whether it is in academia or in society more broadly.

The enduring success of the University of Chicago gives us confidence that these values hold true today as much as they did when this University was founded.

Today we see these values under attack. Across the United States, books are being banned and libraries and librarians are being threatened. The American Library Association recently released statistics that show that, for the third year in a row, attempts to censor books have hit a record number. In the first eight months of this year alone, ALA tracked attempts to get almost 2,000 banned. The vast majority of challenges were to books written by or about a person of color or a member of the LGBTQIA+ community.

Attempts to ban books have often focused on school libraries, but in the last few years public libraries have come more into focus, and we are now seeing more attempts to censor academic libraries too. This is not a surprise. After all, book bans are usually not just aimed at an individual book. They are aimed at what a book stands for and what libraries stand for.

Books are more than containers of knowledge or sources of inspiration or enjoyment. They are a symbol for knowledge and its impact on society. In a similar way, libraries are more than containers of books. They are a symbol for progress and a promise. A promise of a space where we can get lost in thought, get inspired, engage with the world’s knowledge. A promise that a free society accepts and cherishes a multitude of views, even if we personally may not agree with all of them. And a promise that we stand by those who cannot afford access to knowledge,and that marginalized communities can still use their voices.

The University of Chicago stands firmly behind the promise of the book and the promise of the library. We also stand with librarians across the country and all those who seek to inquire or express themselves.

In that spirit, at a press conference with Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton, and UChicago President Paul Alivisatos during Banned Books Week on October 3, I announced that we are taking five steps relating to banned books.

First, the University of Chicago Library has started work to build the Banned Books Collection, an attempt to bring together all books banned in the United States, whether digital or print. We have already a quarter of the more than 1,500 banned books here in our libraries, and we will grow this collection and keep it up to date. We are building this as a research collection, to increase our understanding of book bans, but also to create a historic record. Importantly, this will also be a collection for access, available to everyone who visits our libraries, whether they come from an Ivy League institution or live a few dozen blocks south of us. We will also make this collection available to users of other libraries, through interlibrary loan.

Second, to support those who live in areas where books are banned, we are partnering with the Digital Public Library of America. For more than a decade, the DPLA has worked to widen access to books for everyone in the U.S., through the internet. Through its Palace app, the DPLA already makes two thirds of books banned available in those locations where they are banned . We will work with DPLA to increase that percentage, with the hope to eventually make all banned books available online—in partnership with authors and publishers.

Third, as another part of our partnership, DPLA and UChicago Library will provide all Illinois residents with access to the banned books in the DPLA app , initially for a year. This will support those who cannot come to visit us in Hyde Park or another library that does have a banned book they want to read.

Fourth, in the UChicago spirit, we want to encourage research and debate on books bans, through a program of events with partners such as the DPLA and the UChicago Forum for Free Inquiry and Expression.

Finally, we launched the Freedom to Read fund to allow those who want to support these and future activities of the University of Chicago Library. To make a contribution, please go to the University’s Giving Page and select “Library” and then “Freedom to Read Fund.”

I would be remiss not to acknowledge that some of our patrons may not agree with everything we add to the collection. In fact, it is possible our librarians and even I may be uncomfortable with what is in some of these books or in books that may be banned in the future. But that is what libraries are here for, to create an environment for freedom of discussion and exploration. In this context, libraries are the promise of freedom, of a free and democratic society built on knowledge, of the freedom to dream of a better world for everyone. We stand with everyone who feels this shouldn’t be a dream but reality.

• From the Dean

Melissa Gasparotto joins UChicago as Deputy University Librarian

Prepare for exams with D'Angelo Law Library resources

Extended study hours in Regenstein 1st Floor Reading Room, May 12 – 23

Current exhibits.

Scav Hunt at UChicago: Seeking Fun, Finding Tradition Until Aug. 9, 2024

Workshops & Events

Libra (newsletter)

Media Contact

Rachel Rosenberg Director of Communications [email protected]

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Banned and Challenged: Restricting access to books in the U.S.

Perspective, ashley hope pérez: 'young people have a right' to stories that help them learn.

Ashley Hope Pérez

Author Ashley Hope Pérez wrote Out of Darkness, which is on the American Library Association's lists of most banned books. Kaz Fantone/NPR hide caption

Author Ashley Hope Pérez wrote Out of Darkness, which is on the American Library Association's lists of most banned books.

This essay by Ashley Hope Pérez is part of a series of interviews with — and essays by — authors who are finding their books being challenged and banned in the U.S.

For over a decade, I lived my professional dream. I spent my days teaching college literature courses and writing novels. I regularly visited schools as an author and got to meet teens who reminded me of the students I taught in Houston — the amazing humans who had first inspired me to write for young adults.

Then in 2021, my dream disintegrated into an author and educator's nightmare as my novel Out of Darkness became a target for politically motivated book bans across the country.

Book News & Features

Efforts to ban books jumped an 'unprecedented' four-fold in 2021, ala report says.

Author Interviews

Banned books: author ashley hope pérez on finding humanity in the 'darkness'.

Attacks unfolded, not just on my writing but also on young people's right to read it. Hate mail and threats overwhelmed the inboxes where I once had received invitations for author visits and appreciative notes from readers. At the beginning of 2021, Out of Darkness had been on library shelves for over five years without a single challenge or complaint. As we reach the end of 2022, it has been banned in at least 29 school districts across the country.

From the earliest stages of writing, I knew Out of Darkness would be difficult — for me, and for readers. I drew my inspiration for the novel from an actual school disaster: the 1937 New London school explosion that killed hundreds in an East Texas oil town just 20 minutes from my childhood home. This tragic but little-known historical event serves as the backdrop for a fictional star-crossed romance between a Black teenager and a young Latina who has just arrived in the area.

As I researched the novel, I imagined the explosion as its most devastating event. But to engage honestly with the realities of the time and of my characters' lives, I had to grapple with systemic racism, personal prejudice, sexual abuse and domestic violence. As I wrote, the teenagers' circumstances began to tighten, noose-like, around their lives and love, leading to still more tragedy. I sought to show the depths of harm inflicted on some in this country without sensationalizing that history. The book portrays friendship, loving family, community and healthy relationships because they, too, are part of the characters' world. Then, as now, young people struggle mightily for joy, love and dignity.

When Out of Darkness was first published, I braced for objections. Would readers recoil from the harshness of my characters' realities? Or would they recognize how the novel invites connections between those realities and an ongoing reckoning with racialized violence and police brutality? To my relief, the novel received glowing reviews, earned multiple literary awards, and was named to "best of the year" lists by Kirkus Reviews and School Library Journal . It appeared on reading lists across the country as a recommendation for ambitious young readers ready to face disquieting aspects of the American experience.

So it went until early 2021. In the wake of the 2020 presidential elections, right-wing groups pivoted from a national defeat to "local" issues. The latest wave of book banning exceeds anything ever documented by librarian or free-speech groups. The statistics for 2021, which represent only a fraction of actual removals, reflect a more than 600% increase in challenges and removals as compared to 2020. (See Everylibrary.org for a continually updated database of challenges and bans and PEN America's Banned in the USA reports for April 2022 and September 2022 for further context.)

These book bans do not reflect spontaneous parental concern. Instead, they are part of an orchestrated effort to sow suspicion of public schools as scarily "woke" and to signal opposition to certain identities and topics. Book banners often cite "sexually explicit content" as their reason for objecting to books in high schools. What distinguishes the targeted titles, though, is not their sexual content but that they overwhelmingly center the experiences of BIPOC, LGBTQ+ and other marginalized people. If you were to stack up all the books with sexual content in any library, the tallest stack by far would be about white, straight characters. Tellingly, those are not the books under attack. Claims about "sexual content" are a pretext for erasing the stories that tell Black, Latinx, queer and other non-dominant kids that they matter and belong. Beyond telegraphing disapproval, book bans serve the interests of groups that have long sought to dismantle public education and shut down conversations about important issues.

Debates about the suitability of reading materials in school are nothing new. These include past efforts by progressives to reorient language arts instruction. Concerns about racist language and portrayals might well lead communities to seek alternatives to the teaching of works like The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn . But de-emphasizing problematic classics does not generally entail removing the books from library collections. By contrast, in targeting high school libraries, conservative book banners seek to restrict what individual students may choose to read on their own , disregarding the judgment of school librarians who carefully select materials according to professional standards.

Rather than reading the books themselves, today's book banners rely instead on haphazard lists and talking points circulated online. Social media plays a central role in stoking the fires of censorship. Last year, a video of a woman ranting about a passage from Out of Darkness in a school board meeting went internationally viral. The woman's school board rant resulted in the removal of every copy of Out of Darkness from the district's libraries, triggered copycat performances, and fueled more efforts to ban my book.

Book banning poses a real professional and personal cost to authors and educators. For YA writers, losing access to school and library audiences can be career ending. And it is excruciating to watch people describe our life's work as "filth" or "garbage." We try to find creative ways to respond to the defamation, as I did in my own YouTube video . But there is no competing with the virality of outrage. Meanwhile, librarians and teachers face toxic work conditions that shift the focus from student learning to coping with harassment.

But book banning harms students, and their education, the most. Young people rely on school libraries for accurate information and for stories that broaden their understanding, offer hope and community, and speak honestly to challenges they face. As libraries become battlegrounds, teens notice which books, and which identities, are under attack. Those who share identities with targeted authors or characters receive a powerful message of exclusion: These books don't belong, and neither do you.

Back in 2004, my predominately Latinx high school students in Houston wanted — needed — books that reflected their lives and communities but few such books had been written. In the decades since, authors have worked hard to ensure greater inclusion and respect for the diversity of teen experiences. For students with fewer resources or difficult home situations, though, a book that isn't in the school library might as well not exist. Right-wing groups want to roll back the modest progress we've made, and they are winning.

These "wins" happen even without official bans. Formal censorship becomes unnecessary once bullying, threats and disruption shake educators' focus from students. The result is soft censorship . For example, a librarian reads an outstanding review of a book that would serve someone in their school, but they don't order it out of fear of controversy. This is the internalization of the banners' agenda. The effects of soft censorship are pervasive, pernicious and very difficult to document.

The needs of all students matter, not just those whose lives and identities line up with what book banners think is acceptable. Young people have a right to the resources and stories that help them mature, learn and understand their world in all its diversity. They need more opportunities, not fewer, to experience deep imaginative engagement and the empathy it inspires. We've had enough "banner" years. I hope 2023 returns the focus to young people and their right to read.

Ashley Hope Pérez, author of three novels for young adults, is a former high school English teacher and an assistant professor in the Department of Comparative Studies at The Ohio State University. Find her on Twitter and Instagram or LinkT .

Peter DeWitt's

Finding common ground.

A former K-5 public school principal turned author, presenter, and leadership coach, DeWitt provides insights and advice for education leaders. He can be found at www.petermdewitt.com . Read more from this blog .

Banning Books Is Not About Protecting Children. It’s About Discrimination Against Others

• Share article

In a recent article focusing on collaboration and developing collective efficacy , Katz and Donohoo write,

Collaboration is an essential ingredient of quality implementation, as it is for most high-quality professional learning. But while collaboration sounds easy, it is anything but. It’s not difficult to put a group of people together, but how do you ensure that being together adds value? And how do you avoid getting mired in conflicts and contradictions?

Katz and Donohoo’s questions are important ones. Our collaborative work should add value. Unfortunately, in conversations with teachers and school building and district leaders, it is apparent that there are numerous conflicts they are experiencing which prevent deep collaboration , and it’s not just due to COVID. It’s actually due to politics and the infiltration of right-wing conservative thinking in our public school system.

Lately, there have been numerous news stories about parents who want to ban books. In a recent story on NBC News , they reported more than 50 percent of the books being banned center around an LGBTQ character and children of color. Coincidence that book-banning is around LGBTQ characters or characters of color? Probably not.

In fact, Harris and Alter write ,

Parents, activists, school board officials and lawmakers around the country are challenging books at a pace not seen in decades. The American Library Association said, “In a preliminary report that it received an “unprecedented” 330 reports of book challenges, each of which can include multiple books, last fall.”

Isn’t it interesting, or rather infuriating, that in the very place that students should be engaged in challenges to their own thinking in order to grow as learners, these people are actively making sure that schools are not able to create opportunities for that thinking? Isn’t it interesting that some of the very groups who yell so loudly about cancel culture are the same people trying to cancel discussions about ideas that come to us through books? If Katz and Donohoo are correct about collaboration and conversation, which they are, where is the added value in banning books?

Pornography Is an Intentional Word

The dumbing down of America isn’t due to watered-down curriculum as much as it is the direct result of parents, leaders, and teachers who choose to ban books because, somehow, they don’t agree with what is written within those books.

In an effort to undermine the quality of the books, governors like Greg Abbot of Texas calls them pornographic . Although I would love to say that Abbott chose his words incorrectly, the reality is that he intentionally chose that word to get parents in his state up in arms. I wonder how many of the books being banned have actually been read by the parents trying to ban them.

Sure, they can read a passage at a board meeting, but have they actually read the whole book?

The interesting thing about reading is that it is supposed to expand our ideas and thoughts, not coincide with our confirmation bias. Books are supposed to inspire us to engage in debate and an exchange of ideas, but too many of these states that are banning books would rather censor the freedom of thought. What are they so afraid of? Isn’t it funny that so many of these parents want to unmask their children at the same time they force a mask on their child’s ability to choose a book for themselves? And they certainly seem to mask what this banning is all about, which is pushing institutional racism in their schools.

This Is Not New

The reality is that this issue is not new. People have been trying to ban books for as long as we have been a country. The sad, and often hidden side of all this is when librarians feel the pressure to self-censor the books made available in a library. They do not feel they will be supported by their principals, so they choose to not purchase books for their libraries that may make waves.

In fact, in this article published by the American Library Association (ALA), Asheim writes ,

But many librarians have been known to defer to anticipated pressures, and to avoid facing issues by suppressing possible issue-making causes. In such cases, the rejection of a book is censorship, for the book has been judged—not on its own merits—but in terms of the librarian’s devotion to three square meals a day. Do not misunderstand me—I am as devoted as any to the delights of the table and a roof against the rain. But these considerations should not be mistaken for literary criteria, and it is with the latter that the librarian-as-selector is properly concerned.

As you can see, censorship has many forms, and it’s not just about the seedy instances you hear while watching the nightly news.

Representation Matters … Even If It Makes You Uncomfortable

Many years ago, Albert Bandura began researching self-efficacy, which is the belief we feel in our own abilities. Self-efficacy is context specific, which means we all have areas where we feel confident and areas where we don’t.

What Bandura found in 2000 is that leaders who feel efficacious double their efforts, but those who do not feel efficacious slacken their efforts. What this means is that when leaders, and in this case parents, feel uncomfortable, they will try to stay away from the conversation as much as possible. This is unfortunate, because the only way to become more comfortable is to engage in conversations that help build understanding.

So many people seem to be running away from the very conversations that we should be running toward. But they probably know that already. They don’t want to understand it, nor do they want their children to understand it, which is why they want to ban it. Whether we are conservative, liberal or somewhere in between, we should see representation in the books offered at school. If we are Black, brown or gay, we should see ourselves represented in books. It’s our choice whether we want to check them out or not.

Book banning is a weak response to ideas that scare us. Are the people banning books the same ones that yell from the rooftops that there should be less government involvement in decision making, and yet they want to ban books for others without giving those people a chance to choose for themselves? In states where books are being banned, there should be more and more people who are speaking up against censorship. Kats and Donohoo are right that collaboration within schools is difficult and sometimes complicated. It seems that collaboration within school communities is probably even more complicated.

All in all, the sad reality of all this is that censorship and book banning will definitely work. Too many teachers and leaders do not feel efficacious enough to speak up against these loud censoring parents because they love their jobs and students too much to risk losing their job and students. At some point, though, oppression and ignorance should not be allowed to win this battle.

The opinions expressed in Peter DeWitt’s Finding Common Ground are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

Over 1,600 Books Were Banned During the Past School Year

A new PEN America report finds that targeted campaigns by advocacy groups are behind the increasing bans

Ella Feldman

Daily Correspondent

It’s  Banned Books Week , an annual campaign that began in 1982 to celebrate the  First Amendment and encourage the protection of controversial materials. But now, four decades later, book bans are on the rise, according to a new report from the free speech nonprofit PEN America .

Between July 2021 and June 2022, the report— Banned in the USA: The Growing Movement to Censor Books in Schools —found 2,532 instances of individual bans, which covered 1,648 unique books. PEN America tracks the bans in a public spreadsheet , which indicates that the most-banned book is Maia Kobabe ’s  Gender Queer: A Memoir .

The bans took place in 138 school districts across 32 states; in total, those school districts enroll nearly 4 million students. (These numbers only account for the bans that PEN America was able to track, and the organization says that more likely exist.) The report found that 96 percent of the bans did not follow the best practice guidelines for book challenges outlined by the  American Library Association  (ALA) and the  National Coalition Against Censorship .

About 41 percent of the banned titles explicitly address LGBTQ themes, making these the biggest target of the bans. Books involving sexual content—such as stories about teen pregnancy, sexual assault and abortion—account for 22 percent of the titles. About 21 percent directly address race and racism, while 40 percent feature major characters of color.

The team behind Banned in the USA wanted to determine where book bans originated. They found that in many instances, the bans were the calculated result of work by advocacy groups.

“[T]he large majority of book bans underway today are not spontaneous, organic expressions of citizen concern,” the report states. “Rather, they reflect the work of a growing number of advocacy organizations that have made demanding censorship of certain books and ideas in schools part of their mission.”

PEN America identified 50 groups, some with hundreds of regional chapters, pushing for book bans across the country. The majority of those groups—73 percent—have formed since 2021. 

“These groups probably do not necessarily represent a range of beliefs from our democracy,” PEN America’s Jonathan Friedman, one of the report’s authors, tells Education Week ’s Eesha Pendharkar. “So they’re having an outsized impact in a lot of places on what it is that everybody gets to read.”

Such groups have played a hand in many of the book bans that took place over the last school year; 20 percent of bans can be directly linked to their work, while they appear to have influenced an additional 30 percent. 

“This is a concerted, organized, well-resourced push at censorship,” Suzanne Nossel, the chief executive of PEN America, tells the  New York Times ’ Elizabeth A. Harris. “[The effort] is ideologically motivated and politically expedient, and it needs to be understood as such in order to be confronted and addressed properly.”

Last week, the ALA  released its own report , which examines book bans since the beginning of 2022, and found a similar increase in bans.

“I’ve never seen anything like this,” Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, tells Hillel Italie of the  Associated Press (AP). “It’s both the number of challenges and the kinds of challenges. It used to be a parent had learned about a given book and had an issue with it. Now we see campaigns where organizations are compiling lists of books, without necessarily reading or even looking at them.”

Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Ella Feldman | READ MORE

Ella Malena Feldman is a writer and editor based in Washington, D.C. She examines art, culture and gender in her work, which has appeared in Washington City Paper , DCist and the Austin American-Statesman .

16 Major Pros and Cons of Banning Books in Schools

Banning books is one of the most common forms of censorship that exists in the world today. Banned Books Week began in 1982 to highlight the issues that surround this issue. Since the start of this event, there have been over 11,000 different titles challenged. The vast majority of the reading materials that receive challenges come from parents who disagree with a title’s inclusion on a curriculum list.

Public libraries, universities, K-12 schools, and businesses all over the country see attempts to ban books frequently. The National Coalition Against Censorship reports that there is at least one attempt per week to create censorship over a specific title. The subject matter that gets targeted with the banning process ranges from classics to contemporary best-sellers. You’ll even find biographical non-fiction and fairy tales included on these lists.

Most challenges never result in a ban because students, families, teachers, and librarians take a stand against the censorship. When books do receive a ban, it is usually because there are racial themes involved, an alternative lifestyle portrayed, or violence and sex that makes people uncomfortable.

List of the Pros of Banning Books

1. Parents should have the right to what materials their children can read. Parents are the final line of defense when it comes to protecting their children from inappropriate material for their age group. A book with an adult topic may be entirely enjoyable when people of the correct age have a chance to read and discuss the narrative. That content may not be well-suited to a child’s audience. Waiting until a child is mature enough to understand what vulgar, obscene language, and explicit sexual content is often necessary to promote healthy development.

If this material is available in public or school libraries, then parents might not even know that their kids were exposed to this material. Other students might still talk about the book, but those discussions are very different than applying the narrative in a real-world way.

2. There might be inappropriate content for certain families. 40% of the most challenged books in 2017 contained explicit violence. That is the same percentage that also contained material from the LGBTQIA+ community. 30% of the books were sexually explicit with their descriptions. When students receive exposure to graphic materials, then there can be adverse psychological effects that occur afterward. This issue may lead to more casual sexual partners, having sexual contact at an earlier age, and sensitivity issues.

The American Academy of Pediatrics reports that children who receive exposure to violence in books at an early age can encourage them to act with more aggression. Proponents of banning books say that their goal isn’t to shelter a child from specific content. It is a matter of guiding them toward what is healthy for them to encounter.

3. Banning books from one forum doesn’t eliminate the ability to access content. Banning books in the past was an effective way to keep unwanted materials out of someone’s hands because there were very few communications tools available to society. The world is a very different place in 2019. If parents want their public library to ban a book, then it could be made available online for reading. There are still places to purchase the book as well. No one is preventing them from being written or sold. What some people call “book banning” is more of a responsible choice about what to make available to other people.

4. It gives parents an opportunity to discuss challenging topics with children. Parents want the chance to speak with their kids about subject matters that make many people uncomfortable instead of letting an author shape the narrative with a personal opinion. Reading Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men is an excellent example of this potential advantage of banning books. Dealing with topics like murder and euthanasia may go beyond the understanding of some young children. Other books deal with suicide, peer pressure, and death on a large scale.

Approving books for a school curriculum without parental guidance may shape the perspective of a child without having a chance to form their own opinion. Stopping access at the community level can help kids to get both sides of the conversation.

5. Banned books could stop people from being inspired to take adverse actions. The Catcher in the Rye, a novel by J.D. Salinger, has had a lasting influence on society. It continues to be a best-selling book, but it is also one of the most frequently banned titles that people challenge. It has also been the inspiration for several shootings over the year. When John Hinckley, Jr. attempted to assassinate Ronald Reagan, this book was in his collection at the hotel.

Robert John Bardo was carrying the book when he murdered Rebecca Schaeffer. Mark David Chapman, the man who shot John Lennon, identified with the narrator to the extent that he wanted to change his name to Holden Caulfield. Chapman even read a portion of the book during his sentencing hearing.

6. Censorship can reduce the impact of hate speech. Proponents of banning books say that the act of censorship isn’t a process that is supposed to ban all speech. Hate speech isn’t created equal. The words that some people use to create feelings of personal superiority are damaging. Even when a narrative tries to cloak this issue in righteousness, the potential adverse impact of student exposure could create numerous problems for schools, families, and students. Banning the book before it can inspire hate allows us to reduce the impact of this language in our society.

You can also reduce the amount of conflict that occurs between two people or parties. Limiting information access doesn’t stop someone from producing work. It allows people who don’t want to receive exposure to a specific concept to have an easier way to avoid it.

7. The rights of the creator are still protected even if books are banned. No one is stopping an author from writing a book that some people might find to be offensive. Even if the response to a narrative is generally negative, there is always an opportunity to create something else. Although critics can make a valid argument about the fact that the act of banning can impact the income of the writer, there are still specific markets where the works may be found to be acceptable.

List of the Cons of Banning Books

1. It takes the book away from someone who wants to read it. The idea of the First Amendment is pretty simple: if you don’t like something, then you don’t need to read the book in the first place. Prohibiting the expression of an idea because society finds it to be disagreeable or offensive goes against the wish of the Founding Father. A single disagreement from an individual or a widespread dispute shouldn’t stop others from getting the opportunity to read a book that intrigues them. The role of banning should stay at the family level.

If you as a parent or guardian feel like the material is inappropriate, then it is up to you to look for an alternative solution. It’s not the children who typically need safeguarding either; it’s the books that receive targeting.

2. It creates a false sense of reality for children. The reality of language, sex, and violence in literature is that most people receive exposure to these elements much earlier in life than a junior-level lit class in high school. Kids learn to swear much earlier in life – and probably know all of the “bad” words even if you don’t realize it. Violence in literature is not limited to stories like The Hunger Games. Even the Harry Potter series has moments of violence in it, despite the fact that many people celebrate the stories.

When there is an action taken to ban books, then this behavior is a reflection of having a closed mind. It speaks to the idea that there is one perspective that holds truth in our world. If your opinion falls outside of that thought, then too bad – your literature is going to be withheld from everyone, like it or not.

3. Books are some of our best teachers. Books allow us to put the stories of life into their proper context. The narrative teaches us how to speak from an early age. We can learn some of our social skills from the process of reading. It can even be a way to engage new ways to think. The latter issue is usually why people want to bank books in the first place. People often fear the unknown, which means reading something that feels uncomfortable is a threat which needs to be stopped.

The reality of books is that they are our best teachers. There’s a reason why the titles like Brave New World or To Kill a Mockingbird tend to be the ones that instructors choose for their classes repetitively. Instead of constantly challenging these titles by trying to ban them, it might be more useful to have a sit, grab a cocktail, and read the book one one’s own before trying to stop others.

4. Many banned books become celebrated classics of literature. Almost all of the classics that we read in various literature classes say something that the human race needs to hear. Even the Library of Congress has put together lists of titles that have helped to shape our heritage, each one offering something unique with extraordinary merit. These stories are already designed to confront the various issues of their time, including moral, social, and political problems. Trying to ban the book will not prevent the idea from being unleashed on the rest of the culture. If anything, the act of banning a book creates more of an urge in the general public to read the narrative instead of ignoring it.

5. Books have the capability of changing the world. There are some books that people have read that have changed their life. Many people can remember where they were when they read the Diary of Anne Frank – and that’s one example of many. Books gives us the chance to confront our problems instead of running away from them by watching the TV or making ourselves so busy that we don’t take time to enjoy a creative narrative.

When there is a restriction of free thought, then we encounter the most dangerous subversion of all. From an American perspective, the idea that one offended person can stop everyone else from enjoying the right to read is about as un-American as it gets.

6. It prevents the exploration process of others. Challenged books contain themes that are designed to be challenging to the average reader. The goal of the narrative is to make you think when you’re reading the book. You want to know the reasons why characters choose to take the actions that happen. Readers want the chance to question, explore, or even be offended by what they encounter in the narrative. Could this be a bad thing? Critics say that even the decision to act violently is a personal choice that occurs instead of being something that the book inspires.

7. Many efforts to ban books involve personal opinions instead of facts. In 1983, the Alabama State Textbook Committee called for the banning of Anne Frank because the book was a “downer.” There have been efforts where parents have been considered that there are sexually offensive passages in this young girl’s diary. Although there may be passages in books that may be explicit, there are times when the real world functions the same way. When someone decides to take a gun to a mall to commit a mass shooting, that behavior is a response to specific stimuli. We must look beyond the action to the bigger picture to understand what is happening.

Instead of getting lost in the small moments of a passage, we must take a look at the entire story as a whole. Even controversial books can foster important learning opportunities for many of today’s teens. People tend to make the correct decision if you give them a chance to review all of their options. Banning books stops that process.

8. Tastes and preferences change over the years. Fox’s TV show The Simpsons is an excellent example of how society changes over the years. When it was first introduced in the 1980s, most evangelicals set the content aside, encouraging others on the further right to avoid it altogether because it was in-your-face. Even First Lady Barbara Bush once called the cartoon “dumb.” Then the attitudes began to change in the early 1990s. There were Bible studies developed to complement the series. People began turning the corner to enjoy their new yellow friends on television.

Banning books, like most forms of criticism, tends to be a knee-jerk reaction to an emotional response. When people take the time to review the content that a narrative contains, then there is always something to be taken from it. Some people don’t like The Simpsons because it is animated, which means it targets their children. It may not always be that way.

9. Banning a book causes kids to crave the narrative. Kids want to read books that are realistic. When a narrative is timely and topical, then it has an excellent chance of experiencing a successful experience. Many of the banned books have characters going through circumstances that are similar to what they have in their life at that moment. If you ban that material, then the kids (especially teens) are going to go out of their way to get their hands on the product anyway.

There are some uncomfortable issues that many people might not want to address when they pick up something controversial. The characters might be managing problems with sexual assault, divorce, or prejudice. A great example of this issue is the book called The Outsiders. It is banned in many middle schools, but this narrative is also one of the most-cited books that students say turned them onto reading.

Verdict of the Pros and Cons of Banning Books

The American Library Association tracks book challenges each year. Their data goes back to 1990. In 2017, there were 354 book challenges reported in the United States, which was a 9.6% increase from the figures that were filed in the year before. In most years, about 10% of the reported challenges result in a ban or removal from the institution in question. In 2016, half of the top ten most challenge books were removed.

Parents are responsible for one-third of the challenges that occur to books. 56% of the incidents occur at public libraries. Students are responsible for only 1% of the banning requests that occur each year.

The top three reasons for a removal request are for offensive language, a narrative “unsuited” to any age group, or content that’s sexually explicit. When we look at the pros and cons of banning books, we must take a common-sense approach to the subject. Isn’t it interesting that society has concerns about how people will behave after reading a book, but they don’t share that perspective when it comes to something like gun ownership.

A Case for Reading - Examining Challenged and Banned Books

• Resources & Preparation
• Instructional Plan
• Related Resources

Any work is potentially open to attack by someone, somewhere, sometime, for some reason. This lesson introduces students to censorship and how challenges to books occur. They are then invited to read challenged or banned books from the American Library Association's list of the most frequently challenged books . Students decide for themselves what should be done with these books at their school by writing a persuasive essay explaining their perspectives. Students share their pieces with the rest of the class, and as an extension activity, can share their essays with teachers, librarians, and others in their school.

Featured Resources

T-Chart Printout : This printable sheet allows students to keep notes on parts of books that they believe might be challenged, as well as supporting reasons. Persuasive Writing Rubric : Use this rubric to evaluate the organization, conventions, goal, delivery, and mechanics of students' persuasive writing. The rubric can be adapted for any persuasive essay. Persuasion Map : Use this online tool to map out and print your persuasive argument. Included are spaces to map out your thesis, three reasons, and supporting details.

From Theory to Practice

There are times that the books that are part of our curriculum are found to be questionable or offensive by other groups. Should teachers stop using those texts? Should the books be banned from schools? No! "Censorship leaves students with an inadequate and distorted picture of the ideals, values, and problems of their culture. Partly because of censorship or the fear of censorship, many writers are ignored or inadequately represented in the public schools, and many are represented in anthologies not by their best work but by their ‘safest' or ‘least offensive' work," as stated in the NCTE Guideline. What then should the English teacher do? "Freedom of inquiry is essential to education in a democracy. To establish conditions essential for freedom, teachers and administrators need to work together. The community that entrusts students to the care of an English teacher should also trust that teacher to exercise professional judgment in selecting or recommending books. The English teacher can be free to teach literature, and students can be free to read whatever they wish only if informed and vigilant groups, within the profession and without, unite in resisting unfair pressures." This is the Students' Right to Read. Further Reading

Common Core Standards

This resource has been aligned to the Common Core State Standards for states in which they have been adopted. If a state does not appear in the drop-down, CCSS alignments are forthcoming.

State Standards

This lesson has been aligned to standards in the following states. If a state does not appear in the drop-down, standard alignments are not currently available for that state.

NCTE/IRA National Standards for the English Language Arts

• 1. Students read a wide range of print and nonprint texts to build an understanding of texts, of themselves, and of the cultures of the United States and the world; to acquire new information; to respond to the needs and demands of society and the workplace; and for personal fulfillment. Among these texts are fiction and nonfiction, classic and contemporary works.
• 2. Students read a wide range of literature from many periods in many genres to build an understanding of the many dimensions (e.g., philosophical, ethical, aesthetic) of human experience.
• 3. Students apply a wide range of strategies to comprehend, interpret, evaluate, and appreciate texts. They draw on their prior experience, their interactions with other readers and writers, their knowledge of word meaning and of other texts, their word identification strategies, and their understanding of textual features (e.g., sound-letter correspondence, sentence structure, context, graphics).
• 4. Students adjust their use of spoken, written, and visual language (e.g., conventions, style, vocabulary) to communicate effectively with a variety of audiences and for different purposes.
• 5. Students employ a wide range of strategies as they write and use different writing process elements appropriately to communicate with different audiences for a variety of purposes.
• 6. Students apply knowledge of language structure, language conventions (e.g., spelling and punctuation), media techniques, figurative language, and genre to create, critique, and discuss print and nonprint texts.
• 8. Students use a variety of technological and information resources (e.g., libraries, databases, computer networks, video) to gather and synthesize information and to create and communicate knowledge.
• 11. Students participate as knowledgeable, reflective, creative, and critical members of a variety of literacy communities.
• 12. Students use spoken, written, and visual language to accomplish their own purposes (e.g., for learning, enjoyment, persuasion, and the exchange of information).

Materials and Technology

• Selected books as examples (from the most frequently challenged books list)
• Example Family Letter
• Persuasion Map
• Book Challenge Investigation Bookmarks
• Persuasive Writing Rubric

Preparation

• Because this lesson requires that students read a book from the ALA Challenged Book list, it’s a good idea to notify families prior to starting the assignment. See the example family letter for ideas on how to notify families.
• Bookmark the websites listed as resources to refer to throughout the lesson.
• Compile grade-appropriate books for students to explore using the Challenged Children's Books list .  Talk to your librarian or school media specialist about creating a resource collection for students to use in your classroom or in the library.
• Copy T-Charts and/or bookmarks for students to document passages as they read.
• Test the Persuasion Map on your computers to familiarize yourself with the tool.

Student Objectives

Students will:

• be exposed to the issues of censorship, challenged, or banned books.
• examine issues of censorship as it relates to a specific literature title.
• critically evaluate books based on relevancy, biases, and errors.
• develop and support a position on a particular book by writing a persuasive essay about their chosen title.

Session One

• Display a selection of banned or challenged books in a prominent place in your classroom. Include in this selection books meant for children and any included in the school curriculum. Ask students to speculate on what these books have in common.
• Explain to the students that these books have been "censored."  Ask students to brainstorm a definition of censorship and record the students' ideas on the board or chart paper. When you have come up with a definition the group agrees on, have students record the definition.
• Brainstorm ways in which things are censored for them already and who controls what is censored and how. Examples include Internet filtering, ratings on movies, video games, music, and self-censoring (choosing to watch only 1 news show or choosing not to read a certain type of book).  Discuss circumstances in which censorship would be necessary, if any, with the students.
• Provide the students’ definitions for challenged books as well as banned books. (Share these American Library Association definitions: “A challenge is an attempt to remove or restrict materials based upon the objections of a person or group. A banning is the removal of those materials.”)
• After the students have seen the ALA definition, have the students “grow” in their own definitions. Ask them to revisit their definition and align it with the one presented by the American Library Association.
• Invite the students to brainstorm any books that they have heard of that have been challenged or banned from schools or libraries. Ask them if they know why those books were found to be controversial.
• Students should then brainstorm titles of other books that they feel could possibly be challenged or banned from their school collection.  Allow time for students to share these titles with their classmates and offer an explanation of why they think these titles could possibly be challenged or banned.
• Share with the students a list of banned books .
• Did they find them to be entertaining, informative, beneficial or objectionable?
• Can they suggest reasons why someone would object to elementary, middle school or high school students reading these books?
• If desired, complete the session by allowing students to learn more about Banned Books Week , additional challenged/banned books, and cases involving First Amendment Rights.

Session Two

• From a teacher-selected list of grade-appropriate books from the Challenged Children's Books list , have groups of students select one of the books to read in literature circles, traditional reading groups, or through read-alouds.
• As the students read, ask them to pay particular attention to the features in the books that may have made them controversial. As students find quotes/parts of the book that they find to be controversial, they should add them to their T-Chart , along with an explanation of why they think that this area could be controversial.  On the left side of their T-Chart , they will list the quote or section of the book (with page numbers); on the right side of the T-Chart , they will write their thoughts on why this area could be seen as controversial.
• You may also choose to invite the students to use bookmarks (in addition to or instead of the T-Chart ) , so they can record page numbers and passages as they read.

Session Three

• After the students have completed the reading of their book, have a group or class discussion on the students' findings that they recorded on their bookmarks or T-Chart .
• Next, explain to students that they will be writing a persuasive piece stating what they believe should be done with the book that has been challenged. If students read the book in groups, they could write a team response.
• Share the  Persuasive Writing Rubric to explore the requirements of the assignment in more detail and allow for students' questions about the assignment.
• Demonstrate the Persuasion Map and work through a sample book challenge to show students how to use the tool to structure their essays.
• Provide students with access to computers, and allow students the remainder of class to work with the Persuasion Map as a brainstorming tool and to guide them through work on their papers.  If computer access is a problem, you may provide students with print copies of the Persuasion Map Printout .
• Encourage students to share their thoughts and opinions with the class as they work on their drafts.  Students should print out their work at the end of the session.

Session Four

• Invite students to share their persuasive pieces with the rest of the class. It is their job to persuade teachers, librarians, or administrators to keep the book in their collection, remove the book from their collection, or add the book to their collection.
• For an authentic sharing session, invite parents in for a panel discussion while the children present their thoughts and opinions on the matter of challenged and banned books.
• Students can discuss the books after each presentation to draw conclusions about each title and about censorship and challenges overall.

Concerned Parent The concerned parent is interested in how controversial materials affect school children. The concerned parent wants to maintain a healthy learning environment for students.   Classroom Teacher The Classroom Teacher needs to select books that will both match the interests of the students and also meet the requirements of the curriculum. The Classroom Teacher needs to listen to the parents, and also follow the rules of the school.   School Library Media Specialist The School Library Media Specialist selects library materials based on the curriculum and reading interests the students in the school.   School Lawyer The School Lawyer is concerned about how the students’ civil liberties would be affected if the School Board decided to ban books.

• Students can elicit responses and reactions from peers, teachers, administrators, librarians, the author, and parents in regards to the particular book they are researching. Ask students to focus on the appropriateness of the book in reference to an elementary school collection.  
• Discuss Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico and how after the decision from that court case public school districts around the country developed policies concerning book challenges in elementary, middle, and high school libraries.
• Students can play the role of the librarian and decide where a challenged/banned book should be shelved. For example, the challenged book may be a picture book, but the “librarian” might decide that the book should instead be shelved in the Teacher Resource Section of the library. An alternative for Sessions Three and Four for this lesson plan is to ask students to write persuasive essays explaining where the book should be shelved and why it should be shelved there.

Student Assessment / Reflections

• As students discuss censorship and challenged/banned books, and as they read their selected text, listen for comments that indicate they are identifying specific examples from the story that connect to the information they have learned (you should also check for evidence of this on their bookmarks or T-Chart ). The connections that they make between the details in the novel and the details they choose as their supporting reasons for their persuasive piece will reveal their understanding and engagement with the books.
• Monitor student interaction and progress during any group work to assess social skills and assist any students having problems.
• Respond to the content and quality of students’ thoughts in their final reflections on the project. Look for indications that the student provides supporting evidence for the reflections, thus applying the lessons learned from the work with the Persuasion Map .
• Assess students’ persuasive writing piece using the rubric .
• Calendar Activities
• Professional Library
• Student Interactives
• Lesson Plans

Students brainstorm reasons why certain books might have been banned and discuss common reasons why books are challenged.

Students adapt a Roald Dahl story to picture book format and share their books and add them to the classroom library. Additionally, they compare a book version and film version of one of Dahl's works.

Bring the celebration of reading and literacy into your classroom, library, school, and home all year long.

The current edition of The Students' Right to Read is an adaptation and updating of the original Council statement, including "Citizen's Request for Reconsideration of a Work."

The Persuasion Map is an interactive graphic organizer that enables students to map out their arguments for a persuasive essay or debate.

Add new comment

• Print this resource

Explore Resources by Grade

• Kindergarten K

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Freedom of Speech — Books Should Not Be Banned

Books Should not Be Banned

• Categories: Censorship Freedom of Speech

About this sample

Words: 793 |

Published: Mar 16, 2024

Words: 793 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Table of contents

The freedom to read and access information is a fundamental right that should be protected and upheld in any democratic society, censorship undermines critical thinking, limiting access to valuable and diverse knowledge, inhibiting the development of empathy and understanding.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

6 pages / 2701 words

2 pages / 849 words

2 pages / 937 words

3 pages / 1531 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Freedom of Speech

Every individual possesses the inherent capacity to make a choice between acquiescence and action. The concept of standing up for what is right embodies the courage to confront injustice, challenge oppression, and advocate for [...]

The relationship between freedom of speech and wartime is a complex and contentious one. Throughout history, nations have grappled with the challenge of balancing the imperative of national security with the protection of civil [...]

The Turner v Driver case has been an important and highly controversial legal battle that has sparked heated debates regarding freedom of speech, privacy rights, and the responsibilities of social media platforms. This case [...]

In recent years, social media has become an integral part of our daily lives, with billions of users globally. It serves as a platform for people to connect with friends and family, share information, and engage in discussions. [...]

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution gives us the right to freedom of speech and freedom of press. In my opinion, these rights have been abused in such a manner that the freedom of press has been pushed beyond [...]

Coleman, B. (2010). Hello China, goodbye freedom: The implications of internet censorship for political dissent in the 21st century. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law, 12(4), 891-914.Dutton, W. H., Reisdorf, [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Censorship by the Numbers

ALA compiles data on book challenges from reports filed with its Office for Intellectual Freedom by library professionals in the field and from news stories published throughout the United States. Because many book challenges are not reported to the ALA or covered by the press, the 2023 data compiled by ALA represents only a snapshot of book censorship throughout the year. A challenge to a book may be resolved in favor of retaining the book in the collection, or it can result in a book being restricted or withdrawn from the library.

ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom documented 1,247 demands to censor library books and resources in 2023 . The number of titles targeted for censorship surged 65% in 2023 compared to 2022, reaching the highest levels ever documented by OIF in more than 20 years of tracking: 4,240 unique book titles were targeted for removal from schools and libraries. This tops the previous high from 2022, when 2,571 unique titles were targeted for censorship. Titles representing the voices and lived experiences of LGBTQIA+ and BIPOC individuals made up 47% of those targeted in censorship attempts.

Groups and individuals demanding the censorship of multiple titles, often dozens or hundreds at a time, drove this surge in 2023. Attempts to censor more than 100 titles occurred in 17 states: Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

Get digital assets for Censoship by the Numbers in our Free Downloads , and find additional social media assets on the Book Ban Data page.

Books and Beyond

Books are not the sole target of attacks orchestrated by conservative parent groups and right-wing media. Both school and public librarians are increasingly in the crosshairs of conservative groups during book challenges and subject to defamatory name-calling, online harassment, social media attacks, and doxxing, as well as direct threats to their safety, their employment, and their very liberty.

Who Initiates Challenges?

Prior to 2020, the vast majority of challenges to library books and resources were brought by a single parent who sought to remove or restrict access to a book their child was reading. Recent censorship data are evidence of a growing, well-organized, conservative political movement, the goals of which include removing books about race, history, gender identity, sexuality, and reproductive health from America's public and school libraries that do not meet their approval. Using social media and other channels, these groups distribute book lists to their local chapters and individual adherents, who then utilize the lists to initiate a mass challenge that can empty the shelves of a library.

Where Do Challenges Take Place?

Pressure groups in 2023 focused on public libraries in addition to targeting school libraries. The number of titles targeted for censorship at public libraries increased by 92% over the previous year; school libraries saw an 11% increase.

Share This Page

'Bad faith arguments' by politicians, school authorities are assaults on civility | Opinion

Recently I attended a talk by N.K. Jemison, a renowned science fiction author. Her work reflects some of her experiences as a Black woman in our society. She was asked about current controversies surrounding public and school libraries. For example, almost 300 books have been banned by school districts in Missouri under the state’s “sexually explicit material” law. These include works by Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo, a copy of Reader’s Digest, The Children’s Bible and books about the Holocaust. In 2022, The Oklahoman published a list of books banned in Oklahoma .

Some of Jemison’s books have ended up on banned book lists. She said she takes this as a compliment, and raised the issue of “bad faith arguments.” I do not know if my understanding matches that of Jemison’s, but to me, bad faith arguments are made to promote or defend a position that masks a deeper agenda.

Banning books in school libraries is ostensibly done in order to protect children, but the real issue is power or control. Banning books about trans or gay people is an attempt to suppress information that could help young people be better informed about sexuality. It is part of a landscape of attempted sexual oppression. Interference with teachers’ ability to select curricular materials is another example of bad faith arguments at work.

More from Nancy Snow: In anti-LGBTQ+ climate, we should not be surprised that children die by their own hands

The “critical race theory” controversy is a case in point. Critical race theory, which I have taught in years past, has nothing to do with the history that teachers seek to share with their students. That history is ignominious ― it chronicles the deep harms and injustices that Black and Indigenous peoples suffered at the hands of white people. Suppressing that history is an attempt to erase the sins of the past and undermine present-day claims of people of color.

Bad faith arguments in all of their forms are assaults on civility, and indeed, on a democratic society. When these arguments are made by politicians and school authorities, they suppress freedom of speech and limit education. They are nothing short of blatant power grabs. Censorship is not about protecting anyone. It is about controlling information and people. According to the 2022 article in Education Week that I cited earlier, one district in Missouri ― Wentzville, just west of St. Louis ― was responsible for 220 of the 297 books that Missouri banned. School personnel who violate Senate Bill 775, the law banning the books, could face up to a year in jail or a fine of up to $2,000 .

Bad faith arguments and the political ploys that motivate them should be called out and resisted. Educating future citizens about all aspects of human life is vital for the healthy functioning of democracy. John Stuart Mill, a philosopher writing in England during the 1800s, referred to the “marketplace of ideas.” In a democracy, the marketplace of ideas allows for free and vigorous discussion of all ideas, without arbitrary restriction from the government. Mill believed that false or harmful ideas will be culled through this process.

One thing is certain. History has taught us that, despite authoritarian power plays, truth cannot be suppressed.

Nancy E. Snow is a professor of philosophy at the University of Kansas. She formerly was a philosophy professor at the University of Oklahoma and director of the Institute for the Study of Human Flourishing.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

DealBook Newsletter

TikTok’s Legal Bet on the First Amendment

The popular video-sharing app faces uncertain odds as it takes its fight to court to turn back a potential ban in the United States.

By Andrew Ross Sorkin ,  Ravi Mattu ,  Bernhard Warner ,  Sarah Kessler ,  Michael J. de la Merced ,  Lauren Hirsch and Ephrat Livni

TikTok takes its fight to court

TikTok fired the latest broadside in its battle with Washington, suing to block a law that could force the company to split from ByteDance, its Chinese owner, or face a ban in the U.S.

The company argues that the law violates the First Amendment by effectively killing an app in the U.S. that millions of Americans use to share their views. Another problem: a divestiture within 270 days is practically impossible, Sapna Maheshwari and David McCabe report for The Times .

DealBook spoke with Maheshwari about the lawsuit filed yesterday and what happens next.

Do legal experts think TikTok has a chance at winning?

It could go either way.

Alan Rozenshtein, an associate professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, says that a victory is possible based on the “very, very substantial First Amendment challenge” involved. But he emphasized that it isn’t a certainty.

The government can justify infringing on First Amendment rights in certain cases — especially in matters of national security — and it’s also offered ByteDance the option to sell the app.

How does the lawsuit address the accusation that TikTok is a national security risk?

TikTok has always said that it has spent billions on a security plan that has addressed the government’s concerns. But it also shared a bit of a bombshell in its filing: The company said it had agreed to offer the U.S. government a kill switch that would shut off the app if it violates terms of a draft national security agreement.

In a separate case, a federal judge in Montana blocked a statewide ban of the app . Does that tell us anything about what might happen this time?

The judge in the Montana case said the ban most likely violated the First Amendment. He also said it violated a clause that gives Congress the power to regulate commerce with other countries — but that isn’t relevant here, since Congress passed last month’s bill .

TikTok challenged the Montana law and bankrolled a separate lawsuit from creators that use the platform. A second lawsuit from TikTok users is likely in the coming weeks.

HERE’S WHAT’S HAPPENING

An investigation finds the F.D.I.C. has a toxic and misogynistic workplace culture. Discrimination, bullying and sexual harassment are rife at the agency, according to a report released yesterday . The findings essentially corroborated reporting by The Wall Street Journal last year, and puts more pressure on its chair, Martin Gruenberg, even though it didn’t call for him to step down or removed.

The N.F.L. is said to be closer to allowing private equity firms to become team owners. They would be able to purchase up to 30 percent of an N.F.L. franchise under proposals being discussed, Bloomberg reports . Team owners are expected to present the possible change in ownership guidelines at meetings this month.

Washington revokes some export licenses for U.S.-made chips to Huawei. The move means that Intel and Qualcomm would be prohibited from supplying chips that the Chinese telecommunications firm uses in its laptops and mobile phones, The Financial Times reports .

Stormy Daniels reveals explicit details of her relationship with Donald Trump. The porn star testified for nearly five hours yesterday in the hush-money case about a tryst with Trump that’s at the heart of the case; she is expected to return to the stand tomorrow. But the former president got better news in Florida, where a federal judge indefinitely postponed his classified documents case , dealing him a potential pivotal victory.

Redemption for FTX

The collapse of FTX appears poised to have a happy ending for the failed crypto exchange’s millions of customers: The company said that it planned to repay all of their money, with interest .

It’s a rare moment where a bankrupt company makes creditors whole. But it also raises a question: Was Sam Bankman-Fried, the former FTX leader who was sentenced to 25 years in prison for stealing billions from customers, right when he said he could repay them?

Creditors have been optimistic this would happen, since John Ray III, who became FTX’s chief executive after it filed for Chapter 11 protection, floated the idea this year. Even before that, speculative bets on FTX bankruptcy claims — some bought up for pennies on the dollar — had become a hot investment.

Yesterday’s news also helped drive a 37 percent jump in the price of FTX’s crypto token , FTT, amid a broader rally in crypto assets and Bitcoin.

There are some caveats:

Customers will get back only what they were owed as of November 2022, when FTX filed for bankruptcy, plus interest. That means that they won’t benefit from the huge jump in crypto prices since then: A customer owed one Bitcoin, for example, would get less than $20,000 — despite the token now trading above $62,000.

The federal judge overseeing FTX’s Chapter 11 case, John Dorsey, must approve the company’s restructuring plan. That means that any payouts won’t be made for months.

Is this vindication for Bankman-Fried? The FTX co-founder has argued that the exchange was always solvent and was fully capable of paying back customers. That argument was advanced by his lawyers, friends and family in pushing for a more lenient sentence. From an essay by Ian Ayres and John Donohue , two law school professors and friends of Bankman-Fried’s parents:

The public would view Bankman-Fried very differently if they realized that FTX had sufficient assets to make whole its customers and other creditors all along.

(Bankman-Fried’s allies also faulted Lewis Kaplan, the judge who oversaw the former FTX chief’s criminal trial, for excluding evidence and testimony that Bankman-Fried could make customers whole.)

But critics say that it was never a given that creditors would be made whole. What’s enabling the likely repayment of customers is a combination of the recovery in crypto prices; the sharp jump in the value of FTX’s stake in the A.I.-start-up Anthropic , most of which the crypto exchange has sold; the federal government reducing its claims for unpaid taxes ; and asset sales and clawbacks .

At Bankman-Fried’s sentencing hearing in March, Kaplan said of the exchange’s victims: “The defendant’s assurance that they will be paid in full is misleading. It is logically flawed. It is speculative.”

Red states ramp up their attack on E.S.G.

The war against climate finance is heating up in red-state politics.

The latest salvo involves the State Financial Officers Foundation, a group that works with Republican state treasurers to blunt President Biden’s climate agenda. Their tactics have also had a chilling effect on boardrooms, as the coalition seeks to get companies to back off their climate and social commitments , often by threatening to cut off doing business with them.

The foundation is introducing a new lobbying and political pressure group, S.F.O.F. Action . Its target: E.S.G., or the environmental, social and governance investing principles that grew into a trillion-dollar force on Wall Street, only to face a conservative backlash . The foundation is closely linked to Leonard Leo, an activist who led efforts to move the judiciary to the right and now focuses on defeating the E.S.G. movement .

S.F.O.F. Action will bolster anti-E.S.G. candidates and promote legislation that opposes the adoption of such principles. “S.F.O.F. Action will fight until E.S.G. as we know it is no more,” its executive director, Noah Wall, told DealBook.

State treasurers have become a powerful political force . Of 113 anti-E.S.G. actions since 2018, treasurers pushed nearly half, far outpacing governors and most other officials, according to a new report from Pleiades Strategy, which tracks anti-E.S.G. measures .

The moves are signs that the fight over E.S.G. is going local. Since 2021, lawmakers have introduced bills in 39 states to target E.S.G.; 40 of them have passed , in 22 states. That has helped lead to large companies withdrawing from climate commitments and scaling back business in states hostile to the E.S.G. investing movement.

— The percentage of respondents in a survey published today by the employment law firm Littler of more than 400 executives who were concerned about managing divisive political and social beliefs among their employees ahead of the 2024 election.

Geopolitics and Trump 2.0 at Milken

At the Milken Institute Global Conference in Los Angeles this week, attendees are talking about everything from deals to artificial intelligence. Yet there’s one topic that they’re less worried about: the U.S. election, DealBook’s Lauren Hirsch reports from the event.

Business moguls are taking Donald Trump’s potential return in stride. Attendees told DealBook that they expected more M.&A. and more pro-business government policies if the former president was re-elected. But they don’t expect him to unwind President Biden’s big industrial policies, such as the CHIPS Act or the Inflation Reduction Act, given the benefits those measures have bestowed upon Republican-led states.

Many said that Trump’s advisers would constrain him from making aggressive moves to consolidate power , including over the Fed — and the market is already pricing in a Trump victory in November. (That said, betting markets currently favor Biden .)

They’re more worried about geopolitics:

The war in Gaza dominated conversations on panels and in private dinners and side conversations. But in an acknowledgment of heated debate over the issue, some have taken to calling it the “Middle East conflict” to avoid implying support for one side.

The challenge of doing business in China is another top concern. Attendees see the fight over TikTok as emblematic of the clash between the world’s two biggest economies. Few at Milken see an easy resolution to the standoff over the video app, such as a sale of its U.S. operations to avoid a ban.

The weighty issues haven’t stopped attendees from finding time for a little fun. One of the hottest tickets was a dinner that the private equity firm Cerberus held at the house of the Republican pollster Frank Luntz, where people toured his replica of the Oval Office.

THE SPEED READ

Private equity firms are reportedly weighing a takeover of Peloton , the struggling fitness company whose market capitalization has shrunk to around $1 billion. (CNBC)

Silver Lake , the tech-focused investment giant, has raised $20.5 billion for its latest private equity fund, its biggest ever. (FT)

President Biden is set to announce the creation of a new artificial intelligence center in Wisconsin , a key battleground state, with backing from Microsoft and others. (NYT)

The head of Saudi Arabia’s new $100 billion investment fund for A.I. said he would end its partnerships with China if Washington asked. (Bloomberg)

Best of the rest

OpenAI is releasing a tool to detect if content was created with its DALL-E image generator, in an effort to combat disinformation. (NYT)

“World’s Biggest Construction Project Gets a Reality Check ” (WSJ)

We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to [email protected] .

Andrew Ross Sorkin is a columnist and the founder and editor at large of DealBook. He is a co-anchor of CNBC’s "Squawk Box" and the author of “Too Big to Fail.” He is also a co-creator of the Showtime drama series "Billions." More about Andrew Ross Sorkin

Ravi Mattu is the managing editor of DealBook, based in London. He joined The New York Times in 2022 from the Financial Times, where he held a number of senior roles in Hong Kong and London. More about Ravi Mattu

Bernhard Warner is a senior editor for DealBook, a newsletter from The Times, covering business trends, the economy and the markets. More about Bernhard Warner

Sarah Kessler is an editor for the DealBook newsletter and writes features on business and how workplaces are changing. More about Sarah Kessler

Michael de la Merced joined The Times as a reporter in 2006, covering Wall Street and finance. Among his main coverage areas are mergers and acquisitions, bankruptcies and the private equity industry. More about Michael J. de la Merced

Lauren Hirsch joined The Times from CNBC in 2020, covering deals and the biggest stories on Wall Street. More about Lauren Hirsch

Ephrat Livni reports from Washington on the intersection of business and policy for DealBook. Previously, she was a senior reporter at Quartz, covering law and politics, and has practiced law in the public and private sectors.   More about Ephrat Livni