Censorship In Public Schools

Censorship in Public Schools


-A principal in a California high school bans five books written by Richard

Brautigan because he thinks they might contain "obscenities or offensive sexual

references" (Berger 59).


-A Vermont high school librarian is forced to resign because she fought the

school board's decision to remove Richard Price's The Wanderers, and to

"restrict" the use of Stephen King's Carrie and Patrick Mann's Dog Day Afternoon

(Jones 33).


-An Indiana school board takes action that leads to the burning of many copies

of a textbook that deals with drugs and the sexual behavior of teenagers (Berger

61).


     These cases of censorship in public schools are not unusual and there is

evidence that such challenges are increasing (Woods 2). These challenges are

actually typical of the ones being leveled against school libraries today. These

challenges can come from one person or a group concerned with the suitability of

the material in question. In almost every case, the effort to ban books is said

to be "justified by fear of the harmful effects that the books may have on young

children" (Berger 59). The result of these censorship attempts has been two

opposing sides: one side believes that "more suitable materials can usually be

found from among the wealth of materials available on most subjects (Woods 1),

and the other side believes that students' "intellectual freedom" can be upheld

only if students are allowed to examine "any available relevant materials in

order to gain the insights needed to reach their own conclusions" (Woods 1). In

the simplest terms, the debate is between censorship and the freedom to read.

     The most important question when discussing censorship deals with its

constitutionality; does censorship violate the First Amendment's guarantee of

free speech? Censorship advocates actually use the words of the First Amendment

to make their point; "the amendment reads, 'Congress shall make no law...", it

does not say, "There shall be no law...'" (Berger 69). They believe that,

although the federal government is forbidden to censor, it is not

unconstitutional for states and local communities to pass censorship laws

(Berger 69). Also, since the US Supreme Court does not believe the First

Amendment protects all forms of expression (child pornography, etc.), then

proponents of censorship believe that censorship laws are constitutional (Berger

69). Anti-censorship has the upper-hand, constitutionally, at least, since

"judges, from local courts to the Supreme Court, seem firmly on the anti-

censorship side" (Berger 61). The courts have time and again ruled that the

Constitution prohibits Congress from censorship of any form.

     These two opposing sides have butted heads again and again leaving

behind landmark cases for future legal actions. One of the most famous of those

cases was Pico vs. Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District

No. 26, which was the first school library censorship case to reach the Supreme

Court (Jones 35).  In March 1976, the Island Trees School Board in New York

removed eleven books that they deemed "anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-

Semitic, and just plain filthy" (Berger 59) from the high school library shelves.

Among these books were Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut, A Hero Ain't

Nothing but a Sandwich by Alice Childress, and Soul on Ice by Eldridge Cleaver

(Jones 37). The board felt that it had "a moral obligation to protect the

children in our schools from this moral danger" (Berger 60). Five students then

sued the school board on grounds that their decision violated their First

Amendment rights. The suit was passed around the courts until June 1982 when the

Supreme Court took up the cause and ruled that the school board would have to

defend its removal of the books. The Supreme Court decided that since the

library is used voluntarily, they can choose books there freely and that, as

Justice Brennan stated, "the First Amendment rights of students may be directly

and sharply implicated by the removal of boThis is ONLY a preview of the article. If you would like to view the entire document, you must subscribe to Electronic References. Please register below now!


Get This Full Article After Registration



When you subscribe to Electronic References, you get complete access to the meta-collection of full text articles and papers written by researchers and students spanning the last 5 years. For $19.95 a month, you will receive unlimited access and the ability to expand your research opportunities and knowledge.

This subscription package includes:

24-hours-a-day, 7 days a week unlimited access on any computer with Internet access
Complete access to all 60,000 articles, essays, and research papers
Ability to view, save, print and download any document you find
Ability to browse through perfectly arranged catalog of articles
Superior search and relevancy ranking techniques using our optimalized search engine
Instant access to the online database after registration


You can pay by credit card or checking account. You get instant access after registration:




1 Month ($ 19.95)
3 Months ($ 29.95)
6 Months ($ 39.95)





You will be billed $19.95 every 30 days or $29.95 every 90 days (recurring billing) starting on the day you subscribe.

Your credit card or checking account will automatically be renewed for your convenience until you cancel.