A federal appeals court has intervened to block a Texas law, Reader Act (formerly HB 900), that mandated ratings from booksellers dealing with school libraries, citing its unconstitutionality. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals supported the lower court's decision, stating that the state cannot violate constitutional rights. 

The decision supports the earlier ruling by Judge Alan D. Albright of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, issued on September 18, 2023.

The law, if implemented, would have mandated independent and national chain bookstores, online retailers, publishers, and other vendors to review and rate books and library materials based on sexual content. The reviews would need to adhere to vague state-dictated labels without any avenue for judicial review, affecting millions of books sold to school libraries.

Decision Deems Texas Law Unconstitutional

In affirming Judge Albright's decision, Judge Don Willett emphasized the plaintiffs' interest in selling books without being compelled to convey the state's preferred message. The court rejected the state's argument that the Reader Act would not implicate the plaintiffs' First Amendment rights.

The court rejected the application of the government speech doctrine, affirming that the ratings constituted the vendor's speech, not the government's. Referring to a Supreme Court precedent, the court highlighted that any loss of First Amendment freedom, even for minimal periods, constitutes irreparable injury. The threat to the plaintiffs' right to be free from compelled speech and potential economic harm demonstrated irreparable injury.

The appeals court highlighted the state's interest in protecting children from potentially harmful library materials. However, it emphasized that enforcing a regulation that violates federal law is not in the public interest.

Warnings about the law's impact surfaced, leading to a lawsuit by booksellers. They argued that the law's vague sections made it unconstitutional and could potentially lead to the banning or restriction of classic works like "Romeo and Juliet," "Of Mice and Men," "Maus," and "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings."

READ ALSO: Denmark's New King Frederik X Releases Book 'The King's Word'

Impact on Booksellers

The appeals court found that the law could cause irreparable economic harm to booksellers. Compliance costs for rating books were estimated to be substantial, and one bookseller reported a significant impact on sales to a school district due to the impending law.

Prominent figures in the literary and bookstore community, including Valerie Koehler of Blue Willow Bookshop, Charley Rejsek of BookPeople, Allison K Hill of the American Booksellers Association, Maria A. Pallante of the Association of American Publishers, Mary Rasenberger of the Authors Guild, and Jeff Trexler of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, expressed gratitude for the court's decisive action.

Plaintiffs and their representatives welcomed the decision, emphasizing its significance for bookstores and readers, as well as free expression. Laura Prather, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, hailed it as a victory for Texas and free speech, characterizing the book rating system in the law as a clear violation of constitutional rights.

The Fifth Circuit concurred with the preliminary injunction, stating that the plaintiffs would likely succeed in their First Amendment claims and face potential economic and constitutional injuries if the law was enforced.

The legislation, enacted in 2023, is among several laws approved in states controlled by the GOP, aiming to limit the presence of specific books in schools. Advocates of these laws assert that the targeted books feature content deemed inappropriate, touching on themes such as race, sex, or LGBTQ issues.

RELATED ARTICLE: Federal Judge Allows Lawsuit Over Book Bans in Escambia County, Florida to Proceed