A subcommittee of South Carolina’s Board of Education voted Thursday to recommend removing seven books from the state’s school libraries and classrooms.
The final decision will be made by the full board on Nov. 5.
The committee made the removal recommendation determining the books were not “age and developmentally appropriate due to descriptions of sexual conduct” as defined by a new state regulation passed in June.
The books that will no longer be available in classrooms or school libraries in South Carolina include:
- “Damsel” by Elana Arnold
- “Ugly Love” by Colleen Hoover
- “A Court of Frost and Starlight” by Sarah J. Maas
- “A Court of Thorns and Roses” by Sarah J. Maas
- “A Court of Mist and Fury” by Sarah J. Maas
- “A Court of Wings and Ruin” by Sarah J. Maas
- “Normal People” by Sally Rooney
Department of Education staff developed the list for board members to review and decide on the recommendations to the full board. Board members are not required to read the book.
Robert Cathcart, policy legal advisor, said the books were reviewed by a “highly credentialed academic librarian and a staff employer.”
Though seven books were voted to be removed, the board reviewed 11 books.
The three books voted to be retained were classics and included “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee, “Romeo & Juliet” by William Shakespeare and “1984” by George Orwell.
“Crank” by Ellen Hopkins was voted to be reviewed at another time that was not immediately announced.
Public comment was also allowed during the meeting but was limited to three minutes for both sides to comment on whether they agreed with the staff’s decision to remove or retain materials.
“Literature should be a source of inspiration, not a reminder of pain and suffering,” India Springs said on why she believed “Damsel” should be removed.
Springs, of Columbia, was the only resident to speak in opposition to removing the books.
‘Vagueness of the regulation’
Some speakers said they were grateful that books like “To Kill a Mockingbird” or “1984” would not be removed. But they also expressed frustration with South Carolina’s new regulations on what books can be removed.
Mary Foster, programs director for Families against Book Bans, was skeptical about the list before the meeting.
Committee chairman Christain Hanley made the request that the state’s Department of Education come up with a list of books for review.
“I asked the State Department of Education if there were any books that were challenged in multiple districts that were clearly violative, or if there were any books that came up frequently in our public comments that we might deal with, and so they produced a list,” Hanley said.
Foster said “1984” and “Romeo & Juliet” were used as examples of books that have the potential to be banned under the new regulation.
“I think the problem with that is truly the vagueness of the regulation, those things could be banned based if they followed the letter of the regulation,” Foster said. “I’m never going to speak in favor of banning anything, but the way that it’s written, it’s so broad in general that things like that, if they followed the letter of the regulation could, in fact, be banned.
Foster contends the classics were being used to make a point that the board would not ban everything.
Under the new regulation, books must be “age and developmentally appropriate and educationally suitable and aligned with the purpose of South Carolina’s instructional program.”
But the question remains, who, or what, determines what is “age and developmentally appropriate”.
In an executive summary posted by the department, materials may not include “descriptions or visual depictions of ‘sexual conduct.’”
Foster pointed out during the public comments that the excerpts chosen by staff to qualify “Crank” as inappropriate, all depicted sexual assault and questioned why those scenes meant the book had to be removed.
“The staff recommendation is to remove this from high school libraries because it has sexual conduct. The sexual conduct in this book is not age-appropriate, but the sexual conduct in ‘1984’ and ‘Romeo and Juliet’ is,” Foster said. “Are the depictions of nonconsensual sex what makes it not age-appropriate? And if so, how can we expect young people to mature into adults who understand what consent actually is and what it isn’t if we won’t even let them read about it?”
Cathcart said that if a book had “descriptions or visual depictions of sexual conduct as outlined by South Carolina code” the book must be removed.
“That if any material in a South Carolina public school in the public school system has any excerpts that contain descriptions of sexual conduct. It violates the regulation for all agents. That’s the regulation this board passed. And so as a committee, your job and obligation is to apply that,” Cathcart said.
In June, the Board of Education passed a new regulation after it said schools were discussing the “selection and use of age-appropriate, educationally suitable materials for K-12 students in public schools.”
More:Greenville County Schools to ‘pause’ book fairs after new rules mandated in South Carolina
The new regulation made it so that book selection in classrooms and libraries must be “age and developmentally appropriate” and “aligned with and supportive of the instructional program of the school and district.”
The Department of Education said the new regulation was to reduce confusion and provide a “clear, transparent, and uniform process.”
Thursday’s hearing was the first held by the Instructional Materials Review Committee ― a subcommittee comprised of five members who review books to determine if they meet the state’s new regulation.
The new regulation details a new process for how districts will proceed concerning requests for reconsiderations to have certain books removed, making the district’s school board of trustees responsible for the selection of instructional materials.
If a parent disagrees with the board’s decision, they can appeal to the state’s Board of Education.
South Carolina’s chapter of the ACLU said the department was “operating with shockingly little transparency as it endeavors to remove books from every classroom and library in South Carolina.
“We will continue to stand with our incredible educators and parents and students who do not think it acceptable for one person to impose their worldview on an entire state,” said Josh Malkin, ACLU advocacy director, in a statement. “Attacking the right to access information will lead to a host of unintended and sadly intended consequences. We remain committed to advocating for the freedom to read.”
Savannah Moss covers SC government/politics for the Greenville News. You can reach her at [email protected] or follow her on X @Savmoss.
This post was originally published on here
