>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
“The legislation requires that school library materials be age-appropriate, serve an educational purpose, and be chosen based on a teacher or librarian’s professional training—leaving aside personal or political views which could affect their decision to place the book on the shelf,” Senator Jason Lewis explained.¹
Under the law, a book can only be removed after a school committee vote following “notice, a public hearing and a finding by a review committee of school personnel, appointed by the school committee and the superintendent, that the material is devoid of any educational, literary, artistic, personal or social value or is not age appropriate for any child who attends the school.”²
Translation: librarians and school bureaucrats hold the power, while parents are sidelined.
The debate gained urgency after books like Gender Queer: A Memoir by Maia Kobabe appeared in middle and high school libraries. The book contains graphic sexual illustrations, depicting acts including oral sex and masturbation. Parents have been alarmed that children as young as 12 can access these materials.
“You can’t even show these images in this segment without the FCC fining you,” Texas parent Joni Smith told NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth.³
Gender Queer has topped the American Library Association’s list of most challenged books for three consecutive years, 2021 through 2023, and even holds a Guinness World Record as the “Most banned book of the year.” Other states—including Virginia, Florida, Texas, and Pennsylvania—have removed the book after parent complaints. South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster called for an investigation, labeling the book and others like it “pornographic” and “obscene.”
Massachusetts Democrats, however, are taking the opposite approach, making it harder for parents to contest such materials. The Massachusetts Family Institute has dubbed the legislation the “Pornographic Schoolbooks Bill,” warning that it represents “a dangerous attack on local school control, parental rights, and the innocence of children.”⁴
State Senator Peter Durant opposed the bill, saying it amplifies special interest groups while silencing parents. “Defenders will say it shouldn’t be a particular group that is trying to ban these books,” he told The Worcester Guardian. “Well, you know what? It shouldn’t be a particular group that’s promoting them.”⁵
Sam Whiting, staff attorney at the Massachusetts Family Institute, explained the impact: the law would remove “almost all meaningful limits on what materials a child can access at school.” Mary Ellen Siegler added, “When parents petition school committees to remove pornographic books from a taxpayer-funded public school library, they are not ‘banning books,’ since those same books are widely available elsewhere.”⁶
State Representative John Moran highlighted that parents accounted for only 16% of book challenges in 2024, with just 5% coming from students or library users. “Well-funded, national pressure groups and government entities that include elected officials, board members and administrators do the bulk of the work,” Moran stated.⁷
The bill also ensures that challenged books remain accessible during review, giving activist groups more time to organize campaigns against concerned parents. Senator Jo Comerford framed the legislation as a defense against Trump-era influence, stating constituent feedback since President Trump took office prompted the measure.⁸
Massachusetts Democrats have made it clear where they stand: librarians and activist organizations—not parents—should control what children read. Despite growing resistance from parents, the fight over parental rights versus government bureaucrats is intensifying in one of the nation’s bluest states.
