Missouri is one of the worst states for book censorship

Photo by Tom Hermans

A New York City-based civil liberties and rights group recently rated Missouri one of the most restrictive states in the union for exercising the basic human right to read controversial books.

Only Florida and Texas are rated higher for being more restrictive, according to PEN America. 

PEN America is the U.S.-affiliated advocacy group of PEN International, which has the goal of advocating for First Amendment rights through the work of promoting literature and expression. 

“Punitive state laws, coupled with pressure from vocal citizens and local and national groups, have created difficult dilemmas for school districts, forcing them to either restrict access to books or risk penalties for educators and librarians,” Sabrina Baêta says. 

Baêta is a program consultant for PEN America’s Freedom to Read program, where she studies and researches book bans and other forms of censorship across the country, including Missouri.

“Eighty-seven percent of all book bans were recorded in school districts with a nearby chapter or local affiliate of a national advocacy group known to advocate for book censorship,” says Baêta.

National advocacy organizations Baêta refers to include groups like Moms for Liberty. Moms for Liberty, with chapters in Greene, Jackson, St. Charles, and St. Louis counties, is classified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an anti-government and general hate group. Chapters of the hate group in other states gained notoriety for intimidating public school boards and district officials. 

It is additionally worth noting, for context, that Moms for Liberty is involved in Project 2025—an astroturfing initiative led by the conservative Heritage Foundation in the guise of a ‘presidential transition’ blueprint for a conservative president-elect if the Republicans win the 2024 election.

The Heritage Foundation has advocated for book censorship policies by presenting the measures as “reasonable” parental rights initiatives. Using the parental rights narrative could be considered a sanitized and more palatable justification for censorship to sell book ban policies to the masses.

Zooming in on Missouri, Baêta explained that nearly two-thirds of all book bans have occurred in states where legislation and regulations have “either directly facilitated book bans or created the conditions or local groups to pressure and intimidate educators and librarians into removing books.”

One such example includes a controversial regulation imposed on public library systems by Jay Ashcroft, the incumbent Secretary of State and ultraconservative Republican candidate for Missouri governor. The regulation is 15 CSR 30-200.015, entitled the “Library Certification Requirement for the Protection of Minors.” The regulation stipulates that the state librarian and the administration of the state librarian “shall not distribute any funds to any library” if the public library system doesn’t meet certain requirements.

First, libraries that receive grants and other forms of funding from the state library must publish a collection development policy covering “how selections are made in considering the appropriateness by age of any minor.”

Secondly, the funds a library receives from the state library cannot be used “to purchase or acquire material that constitutes ‘child pornography,’ is ‘pornographic for minors,’ or is ‘obscene.’” This rule also aligns regulations with a state law that makes it a criminal offense for a school librarian or staff member of a school to provide students at all grade levels with “age-inappropriate” or sexually explicit material, per the statute. Critics, however, point out that the regulation leaves a lot of confusion. For example, librarians have told media outlets in the past that the Ashcroft rules are extremely capricious.

In comments to The Pitch, Sec. Ashcroft says that 15 CSR 30-200 was needed to boost the involvement of parents and guardians to align libraries with local beliefs.

Maus in chains. // Photo illustration by John Partipilo

“When state dollars are involved, we want to bring back local control and parental involvement in determining what children are exposed to,” says Ashcroft. “Foremost, we want to protect our children. One of the best ways to do that is by [making] sure parents know what their child is exposed to.

A spokesperson for Ashcroft says, “Each library writes its own policy based on its governing board and the community it serves. Libraries will craft policies to determine what material is age-appropriate (many libraries already have written policies in place). As well, state funds cannot be used to purchase or acquire inappropriate materials. Libraries will also be required to honor a parent’s decision as to what material their child has access to in the library. Parents will have the right to challenge a library’s age-appropriate designation.”

But the point of concern for critics of the regulation, namely PEN America and a slate of Democrats in Missouri, is that the Ashcroft regulation could be misused and abused by a class of individuals who wish to see entire categories and genres of literature blocked in libraries.

“We must follow our state constitution, where Missourians demand the state fund our libraries, and continue to ensure everyone has free access to an education and all wonderful things libraries bring to our towns and cities,” says Democratic state Rep. Crystal Quade. 

Quade, the state House Minority Leader representing House District 132 in Springfield, is also running for governor for her party’s nomination. Quade has been critical of Ashcroft before and spared no words when asked about Ashcroft’s library funding policy: “Ashcroft and the MAGA extremists in Jefferson City continue to show their disdain for libraries and personal freedoms, and the PEN America report shows the direct impact that is having on our communities.” 

Baêta also winced no words: “Our elected officials can’t have it both ways. If they purport to be champions of free speech, we should see them outraged over book bans and legislation [and regulations] from prohibiting certain types of content and expression in schools.”

Ashcroft said that he has long supported libraries since he assumed the position of Missouri Secretary of State.

“Supporting the efforts of libraries across our state has been a priority of mine since day one—we have been able to provide millions of dollars to libraries through grants and other funding,” Ashcroft says. “Yes, we want to make sure libraries have the resources and materials they need for their constituents, but we also want our children to be ‘children’ a little longer than a pervasive culture may often dictate.”

But what is considered “pervasive?” One parent’s views on what is considered “pornographic” for minors will not be the same as what other parents view.

“MLA continues to monitor challenges to materials in schools and public libraries throughout the state,” says Cody Croan Croan, a librarian and the chair of the non-profit Missouri Library Association’s (MLA) legislative committee. “With the number of challenges to materials increasing, it’s likely to be a trend that will continue into the next year. When that happens, there is always a concern that citizens’ right to freedom of speech will be diminished. MLA continues to support Missouri public and school libraries facing these challenges by providing resources and training.”

Missouri is considered by the Human Rights Campaign as one of the states in the union that has yet to achieve basic equality for LGBTQ+ people. The Movement Advancement Project rates Missouri as one of the worst states for policies targeting and regulating gender identity and is considered by the project to be low-rated for equality policy in general. This is also evidenced by Attorney General Andrew Bailey and his work to litigate against gender-affirming healthcare providers. The immediate issue of book bans also highlights Sec. Ashcroft’s intentions regarding the rights of librarians and the professional organizations that represent them in the state, such as MLA, and across the country.

Ashcroft withdrew the Missouri State Library from the American Library Association (ALA) in July 2023. In an open letter addressed to ALA’s executive director Tracie Hall, he said, from his view, that the association has taken a “blatantly political stance.” 

Other state library agencies and regional library systems have withdrawn their memberships and affiliations from the ALA. Do note that the withdrawals come from state library agencies in conservative-leaning states where book banning is on the docket for several elected officials, including scores of state lawmakers and governors. ALA has criticized the Missouri General Assembly and the administration of Gov. Mike Parson for adopting the controversial and extremely punitive Senate Bill (SB) 775.

Now a Missouri criminal statute, Senate Bill 775 made it a sex crime for any school librarian or educator who “provides, assigns, supplies, distributes, loans, or coerces acceptance of or the approval of the providing of explicit sexual material.” 

SB 775 recognizes “a person affiliated with a public or private elementary or secondary school in an official capacity.” This intentionally broad definition covers everyone from a librarian to the lowly school bus driver. The Missouri affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued state prosecutors on behalf of professional organizations Missouri Library Association and the Missouri Association of School Librarians, seeking to block Senate Bill 775.

The ACLU of Missouri filed the initial complaint at a circuit court in Kanas City. A federal court remanded the case back to the state courts after the case was granted review.

SB 775 is one of the first laws in the United States that ultimately criminalizes school librarians and educational professionals for covering or offering controversial books that are viewed as “pornographic” to K-12 students.