June 9, 2014Dr. Michael J. Roberts, PrincipalBooker T. Washington High School6000 College ParkwayPensacola, FL 32504mroberts@escambia.k12.fl.usDear Dr Roberts:We write to express concern about the decision to cancel the assignment of Cory Doctorow’s novel,
Little Brother
, for a school-wide summer reading program at Booker T. Washington High School, a few days before the beginning of the summer break.As we understand it, the book was selected after an extensive process by the professional staff. There was no formal challenge tothe book and thus no reconsideration by a review committee to address the merits of the book or respond to any objections to it.Even though you apparently recognize that the book is well-written and that it addresses important and timely topics, we gatherthat you decided to withdraw the assignment because of concerns that some parents might object to scenes involving sex andviolence and the idea of questioning authority, School officials are bound by constitutional considerations, including a duty not to give in to pressure to suppress unpopular orcontroversial ideas. Removing a book because it contains ideas that some members of the community may object to, ordisapprove of, violates basic constitutional principles. According to the Supreme Court, the "bedrock principle underlying theFirst Amendment… is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the ideaitself offensive or disagreeable."
Texas v. Johnson
(1989). The First Amendment “protects the citizen against the State itself andall of its creatures — Boards of Education not excepted…. That they are educating the young for citizenship is reason forscrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teachyouth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes…. ….”
West Virginia Board of Education v.Barnette
(1943).Indeed, confronting controversial and complex themes in literature is part of the educational mission of the schools. A schooldistrict puts its students at a distinct disadvantage if it fails to introduce them to the wide range of ideas that they will encounterin college and in life. Excluding works out of fear that they might be controversial would deny students exposure to a wide rangeof material, including works by Shakespeare, Hawthorne, Faulkner, Hemingway, Steinbeck, Angelou, and Toni Morrison, toname but a few. As these examples suggest, any attempt "to eliminate everything that is objectionable…will leave public schoolsin shreds. Nothing but educational confusion and a discrediting of the public school system can result…."
McCollum v. Board of Educ
. (1948) (Jackson, J. concurring).Canceling the assignment privileges the political, moral, and religious beliefs of some individuals, who might object to thebooks content, over others, who would not. It is precisely this form of viewpoint discrimination by government that ourconstitutional system is designed to prevent. Educators are rarely held to violate the First Amendment when they
include
material that has pedagogical value, even if it is offensive to some, whereas acceding to a demand – actual or anticipated – toremove material for ideological reasons is vulnerable to legal challenge. See
Monteiro v. Tempe Union High School District
(9thCir. 1998) (recognizing the First Amendment right of students to read books selected for their “legitimate educationalvalue”),
Parker v. Hurley
(1st Cir. 2008) (rejecting effort to remove books that offend parents’ and students’ religious beliefs),and
Pratt v. Independent School Dist. No. 831
(8th Cir. 1982) (First Amendment violated when films removed because of hostility
BYELECTRONICMAIL
to content and message).It is no answer to say that the book has not been “censored” because it is still available from the library, bookstores, or, in thiscase, online. A book does not have to be censored everywhere to be censored somewhere, nor does it have to be madecompletely inaccessible to fall within the First Amendment's prohibition on government action "abridging freedom of speech."Public school students are entitled to be exposed to a wide variety of viewpoints unconstrained by limits imposed by what somethink is controversial subject matter. These are precisely the ideas they will soon confront in real life.We strongly urge you to reinstate
Little Brother
as the school-wide summer reading assignment. We appreciate the difficultiesyou might encounter from some elements in the community, but you will be acting not only in accordance with fundamentalconstitutional values but also in the best interests of students if you stand up for the principle that they should be able to readand discuss literature of all kinds. You will also have wholehearted support from a community of educators, First Amendmentexperts, and advocates for students.Please feel free to call on us if you wish to discuss these issues, or if we can be of further assistance.Sincerely,Chris FinanPresidentAmerican Booksellers Foundation For Free ExpressionJudy PlattDirector, Free Expression AdvocacyAssociation of American PublishersSusanna ReichChair, Children's and Young Adult Book CommitteePEN American CenterJoan BertinExecutive DirectorNational Coalition Against CensorshipCharles BrownsteinExecutive DirectorComic Book Legal Defense FundMillie DavisSenior Developer,Affiliate Groups and Public OutreachNational Council of Teachers of EnglishLin OliverExecutive DirectorSociety of Children’s Book Writers & Illustrators