ACLU’s Matthew Callahan has questioned Taylor’s banning library books; Taylor argues he isn’t banning books. Election Day will decide who has final say.
by Adele Uphaus
MANAGING EDITOR AND CORRESPONDENT
The ACLU of Virginia is continuing to push back against the decision by Spotsylvania school superintendent Mark Taylor to ban some 30 titles from high school libraries.
In a letter sent to Spotsylvania School Board Chair Lisa Phelps last month, Matthew Callahan, senior supervising attorney with the ACLU of Virginia, called Taylor’s decision a “gross misunderstanding” of Virginia Code section 22.1-16.8.
Taylor has pointed to this law, which requires School Boards to implement policies ensuring parental notification of instructional material with sexually explicit content, to support his decision to remove the books.
Next week’s election could change how the Spotsylvania School Board tackles the issue of potentially objectionable library books.
In his letter, Callahan noted that Senate Bill 656, which enacted this law, contains a clause limiting how it can be applied.
“The provision of this act shall not be construed as requiring or providing for the censoring of books in public elementary and secondary schools,” the bill states.
Callahan informed the School Board that “the automatic removal of challenged library books from circulation, preventing any student’s access, is censorship that contradicts the Law’s express limitations.”
He stated that book bans are a violation of First Amendment rights.
Taylor has argued against using the term “ban” to describe the removal of the books from high school libraries, pointing out in an Oct. 26 email to the school community that the books are still “conveniently” located in public libraries.
However, PEN America defines a school book ban as “any action taken against a book based on its content and as a result of parent or community challenges, administrative decisions, or in response to direct or threatened action by lawmakers or other governmental officials, that leads to a previously accessible book being either completely removed from availability to students, or where access to a book is restricted or diminished.”
The ACLU letter also described Taylor’s assertion that library materials count as instructional materials as a “(unilateral) interpret(ation) (of) SCPS Board policy to stretch its scope of application to fit a political agenda.”
Callahan concluded his letter by urging the School Board to “use its authority … to enter a final disposition returning the 23 challenged books to its libraries.”
(Some) Candidates Answer Questionnaire on Censorship
Next week’s election could change how the Spotsylvania School Board tackles the issue of potentially objectionable library books. The ACLU of Virginia asked all candidates for School Board to describe their positions on censorship – as well as on LGBTQ+ issues and equity in education – on a questionnaire.
The questionnaires were sent by email early in August, with an initial deadline of Aug. 28.
“We sent several follow up emails to all candidates prior to the August 28 deadline and offered extensions so far as September 29,” said Breanna Diaz with the ACLU of Virginia.
Only Carol Medawar, the Democratic-endorsed candidate for the Courtland District School Board seat; Lorita Daniels, the Democratic-endorsed Salem District incumbent; and Alex Carlson, one of three candidates for the Livingston District seat, responded to the ACLU questionnaire.
[Carol Medawar] opposes book bans, which she sees as denying parents the right to have input into their child’s education.
On censorship, candidates were asked whether they believe schools should teach a comprehensive history curriculum that covers diverse perspectives and whether they oppose book bans that “attempt to limit students’ access to materials that reflect the diversity and interests of the student population?”
Medawar wrote that she supports a diverse history curriculum that provides “opportunities for students to think critically and analyze situations and contexts through the lens of history” and added that, “Those who do not study the past are doomed to repeat the past.”
She also indicated that she opposes book bans, which she sees as denying parents the right to have input into their child’s education.
“Policy on materials and activities in school must be flexible enough to meet the needs of a diverse community that represents many different backgrounds and values,” Medawar wrote. “I believe we should trust licensed professional educators to select materials that are aligned to the standards of learning and represent and reflect the diversity and interests of the student population. Parents should have the opportunity to review and if necessary opt out of materials they object to for their own students.”
Books “should be used to enhance our understanding and increase our awareness about the things around us, including our historical past.
– Lorita Daniels
Daniels also said she supports a complete history curriculum that includes the perspectives of minority and underrepresented communities.
“Our children must know their history and understand why we are the way we are as a country. The more they know, the more they understand how the past has affected our progress,” she wrote. “Once kids know where we have been and where we are going, they can develop their sense of identity and belonging, which are essential for them to become thriving adults.”
Daniels said she opposes book bans and that she does not like books being used as “political ploy(s).”
Books “should be used to enhance our understanding and increase our awareness about the things around us, including our historical past,” she wrote.
Carlson said he agrees that history should be taught “comprehensively” but cautioned against “telling children that they should watch how they act because their legacy is one of discrimination.”
He said he fears children will either believe that characterization or rebel against it, thereby “creating more discrimination.”
“I’d personally rather spend more time teaching kids character, how to think, and to be kind to each other rather than trying to feed children divisive topics that focus on the past and not the future,” Carlson wrote in his response.
On the book issue, Carlson said he opposes “rush decisions, abuses of power, lack of compassion, lack of accountability, and ‘banning’ things.”
He said he would focus on developing a “fair and consistent” policy that incorporates input from parents, other School Boards, subject matter experts and state guidelines.
The Fredericksburg Advance reached out to the candidates who did not respond to the ACLU’s questionnaire – David Ross, the Republican-endorsed candidate for the Courtland seat; Chris Harris, the Republican-endorsed candidate for the Salem seat; and Megan Jackson, who did not seek or accept an endorsement from either party – but did not receive a response.
Odds and Ends at FXBGAdvance.com
The Fredericksburg Advance continues to bring local coverage of the November 2023 elections. For our 2023 Voters Guide please click on the link below:
To view local obituaries or to send a message to family and loved ones, please visit our website by clicking on the link below:
PULLEN: Devine Will Be Mayor … She May Wish She Weren’t
Watch for our afternoon e-mail, which features guest columnist Rick Pullen talking about the economic difficulties that loom at Fredericksburg’s gate. Here’s a taste:
There are two reasons Kerry Devine has no opposition in her campaign for Fredericksburg mayor next week. The first, and this should not be understated, she’s extremely popular among voters. …
But there’s another reason she’s running unopposed. No one else wants the job.
That’s understandable when you realize during her upcoming four-year term as mayor, the city will be hit with an economic tsunami the likes of which it hasn’t experienced since 1980.
Invite your friends and neighbors to join the Advance and read this important column.
Support Local Journalism
The FXBG Advance is off and running, but we can’t do this without your help. You can support local journalism here in Fredericksburg by donating $8 a month. Your dollars will go toward hiring journalists so that we can broaden our reach and strengthen our coverage.
The content is now, and will continue to be, free.
Help us bring aboard the journalists who will elevate our coverage and strengthen the community we all share.
Consider joining for $8 monthly, $80 yearly, or becoming a supporting member for $200 or a Founding Member for $500.
Thank you for reading and supporting FXBG Advance.
-Martin Davis, Editor
Will the ACLU ever take the school board and/or Taylor to court? Would the ACLU combine us us with residents from other jurisdictions to do so? Can we, the residents of Spotsylvania County, take them to court? Are there enough residents to contribute money to file suit?