New Jersey Governor Signs Law Making Book Bans More Difficult, Shields Librarians From Civil Suits

In this new era of censorship — aided and abetted by people who think they can “make America great again” by destroying the rights that actually make America great — almost every state is dealing with mass censorship efforts. Most of these involve libraries because motivated bigots have found leverage points to maximize their efforts without ever having to leave the comfort of their homes.

Bathed in the glow of their laptops, keyboard warriors are submitting book challenges at an alarming rate, forcing states that never thought this would be an issue to play defense against part-time censors using copy-pasted boilerplate to ensure their fellow Americans only have access to the kind of content they approve of.

Book bans have been erected in several states. And many of these laws have already been struck down as unconstitutional. But for people who need to do nothing more than wield a keyboard, it hardly matters. The assault on free speech continues, mainly because it’s also an indirect assault on people of color, LGBTQ+ Americans, and anyone else considered to be too “woke” or “not white enough” to be allowed to detail their own personal experiences.

Fortunately, some states are pushing back before these efforts become a literal constitutional crisis. The state of New Jersey is the latest to preempt these unconstitutional attacks on free speech. A bill signed into law by Governor Phil Murphy not only makes book challenges more difficult, but it ensures library staff can’t be personally sued for their content moderation decisions.

Under the law, public and school libraries are barred from excluding books because of the origin, background, or views of the material or of its authors. Censoring books will also be prohibited solely because a person finds them offensive. The bill permits restriction in the case of “developmentally inappropriate material” for certain age groups. The measure also requires local school boards and the governing bodies of public libraries to set up policies for book curation and the removal of library materials, including a way to address concerns over certain items.

That’s only part of the good news. The other part is that the law [PDF] prevents Trump-addled Americans from personally bankrupting librarians because they made informed decisions about what content to keep in their libraries, as well as who should have access to it.

Any staff member of a public library, including a librarian employed by a public library, shall be immune from civil and criminal liability arising from good faith actions performed pursuant to the provisions of sections 9 through 11 of this act.

NJ residents are still free to throw as many BS book challenges at the wall as they can, but demands for removal are no longer entirely in the hands of library staff. Instead, their requests will be handled on an individual basis by a committee that includes librarians, government employees, a local resident (who cannot be the person named on the removal request), and other oversight officials as the government deems necessary. While the request is under review, targeted content will remain accessible to all library users.

It’s touted as a ban on book bans, but it can’t actually prevent a ban from taking place. What it does do, however, is make it extremely unlikely that any challenged book will be banned. Existing laws prohibit making obscene material available to minors and it’s extremely unlikely any state or local employee staffing libraries are interested in violating these laws. But the book banners tend to believe any content they don’t care for must violate obscenity standards and use this leverage to target local libraries and their employees for personal, litigious pain. This law ensures that can’t happen. And the creation of a review group will help prevent it from being beholden to particular ideological interests.

Of course, this isn’t going to make would-be book banners happy. They’ll argue every defeat is the result of some liberal cabal with ties to pizza molestation joints or whatever. But the rest of the state’s residents will remain well-protected under state law, as well as by the US Constitution, which the framers earnestly intended to protect US citizens from government-enabled censorship, which every book ban definitely is.