Stricter book-banning laws rolled out in 2026 are spreading across states, affecting public libraries, schools, universities and raising new concerns about academic freedom while challenging the American Library Association’s (ALA) warning that suppressing ideas is “fatal to a democratic society.” 

Many of the targeted titles center around LGBTQIA+ themes, identity, women’s literature, sexual and gender studies, with some states weeding through books before they reach the shelves, leaving communities unaware of the potential censorship.

States use formal processes to ban books, beginning with a challenge to an attempt by a community member or lawmaker to remove or restrict a novel they find disagreeable. The challenge then goes through a review process where a library or committee decides whether the book stays or is removed, though a challenge does not automatically lead to a ban. 

Banning can be one of the final outcomes of a challenge, and once a review is completed, removing a book from a school or library becomes an option. Bans can result from administrative decisions, but more recently they have been driven by laws that require automatic removal.

Professor and Instruction Coordinator for the CWU library Elizabeth Brown said she feels “fortunate that we are in an academic environment where intellectual freedom is still offered the respect that it deserves in helping students learn about diverse topics and about anything.” 

While Washington’s political climate makes book bans less likely, states such as Texas, Florida, Tennessee, Utah and the Carolinas have enacted restrictions for years, with a sharp rise reporting 6,870 bans during the 2024-25 school year, which is the latest report collected from 23 states and 87 public schools found by PEN America. 

The ALA reported 47,162 books were challenged or banned in schools and libraries from 1990 to 2024, driven by “overcompliance with censorship driven laws and policies” and the spread of soft-censorship practices. Although 2025 data remain difficult to track, current weeding and filtering already number in the thousands, and many removals occur quietly and without public record. 

PEN America has documented “nearly 23,000 book bans in public schools nationwide since 2021, a number without precedent,” noting that vague legislation has fueled the surge in censorship. Campaigns to “protect the children” and the “parental rights” have intensified the filtering of titles, overwhelming librarians resorting to rely on inaccurate methods using AI as a means of assistance. 

CWU Professor of Psychology Cynthia Coe said fear is at the root of the current surge in book restrictions, noting that when ideas are viewed as dangerous, some seek to “produce the kind of citizens they want” by limiting what people can read. She describes this approach as indoctrination and propaganda, adding “that’s not what schools and libraries are for.” 

PEN America tracked book bans nationwide since July 2021, reporting documented restrictions in 42 states. Vague or poorly drafted legislation has contributed to the rise, as schools and districts fear violating rules; in Florida, for example, a “Don’t Say Gay” law prohibited any instruction related to gender identity and sexual orientation. 

The purpose of these resources is to provide access to information and a range of perspectives, Coe said, “allowing people to think for themselves and gather information that they’re interested in and form their own judgements … [is]what’s so beautifully democratic about those institutions.” 

The term “weeding” has increasingly been misused by book-ban advocates, who frame it as a tool for censorship rather than a routine library practice. In most libraries, weeding refers to removing books that are damaged or outdated; however, critics say recent actions to redefine the term reflect ideological motives rather than standard librarian management. 

A recent case in Texas illustrates how easily the process can be exploited. A group of parents submitted a list of 100 titles they deemed inappropriate, citing “radical gender ideology, critical race theory, COVID misinformation or a combination of the three.” The district ultimately removed 45 of those books, a move officials said was intended to maintain “the appearance of routine policy compliance,” says Book Riot. 

The newly adopted use of AI to assist librarians in filtering books has produced widely inconsistent results across counties. Efforts to bring collections into compliance with restrictive laws such as House Bill (HB 900), Senate Bill 12 (SB12) and Senate Bill 13 (SB13) have placed significant pressure on libraries turning to AI systems to analyze titles and flag potential violations, it is a move intended to reduce the workload but also raises concerns about accuracy and oversight.

However, using AI for this purpose has proven unreliable, largely because these systems can only access publicly available information, leaving significant portions of books unexamined. Copyright restrictions further the limits on what AI can review, preventing a full assessment of context and themes. Moreover, unlike trained librarians, AI is not equipped to evaluate books comprehensively; instead it filters titles based on whatever information is publicly posted and the broad, often ambiguous language written into recent legislation.

According to reporting from PBS News, Austin, Texas recently faced a high-profile case of state-sanctioned censorship that remains unsolved. Residents petitioned a local library to remove several titles, and county commissioners instructed librarians to comply. A separate group of residents then filed suit to keep the books on the shelves, splitting the community between two sharply opposing views. The result was that the appeals court’s majority ruled “the decision to remove a book from the library shelf is not a book ban.”

The PBS article includes a statement from Sam Helmick, president of the ALA, who argued that the Supreme’s courts decision “threatens to transform government libraries into centers for indoctrination instead of protecting them as centers of open inquiry, undermining the First Amendment right to read unfettered by viewpoint-based censorship.” 

Florida has drawn national attention as a leading force behind recent book-banning legislation, and their efforts have spread influence to 20 other states. According to Book Riot, “Florida voters are deeply disenfranchised, and they’re gerrymandered; these are the tools that the right uses to hold onto power, since the voting general public does not elect these people by majority freely.” 

Because of this, Florida serves as a template for book-censorship efforts nationwide. In one instance the state had demanded public schools to ban 55 or more books without any means of review; in another case, the state identified 23 titles that violated House Bill 1096 (HB1096), for allegedly containing themes of sexually explicit content, however Judge Carlos Mendoza stated that none of the 23 titles had been obscene or were in violation of the law.

“Creating this picture of what you want the world to be, but it’s not necessary,” Brown said. “Education is not what you want the world to be. It’s what we want the world to be, and it’s this shared experience, and books provide that shared experience.”

List of Recognizable Banned Books as of 2025 Recorded by PEN America: 

• Last Night at the Telegraph Club, by Malinda Lo
• A Court of Thorns and Roses, by Sarah J. Maas 
• A Court of Mist and Fury, by Sarah J. Maas 
• A Court of Frost and Starlight, by Sarah J. Maas
• A Court of Wings and Ruin, by Sarah J. Maas 
• The Perks of Being a Wallflower, by Stephen Chbosky 
• All Boys Aren’t Blue, by George M. Johnson 
• The Bluest Eye, by Toni Morrison 
• Milk and Honey, by Rupi Kaur 
• Looking for Alaska, by John Green 
• The Handmaid’s Tale, by Margaret Atwood