Alabama Backs Florida Library Law

Alabama has joined 20 other States in a brief urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to uphold Florida’s law barring sexually graphic books from public-school libraries. The amicus brief, led by Arkansas Attorney General (AG) Tim Griffin and co-signed by Alabama AG Steve Marshall, argues that library content choices are “government speech” and that schools need not make sexually explicit material available to K-12 students. 

The brief joins the appeal of a federal district judge’s order blocking enforcement of the Florida law for possible First Amendment violations.

Marshall said, “It should be common sense that the First Amendment does not require public schools to fill their library shelves with graphic books depicting sex acts. … we call on the Eleventh Circuit to quickly correct the decision of the district court.”

The coalition includes Attorneys General from Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia.

While Alabama backs Florida’s appeal, Alabama’s own public library system is at the center of a sharp dispute over what materials belong in youth library sections.

In late 2025, the Alabama Public Library Service (APLS) Board of Directors approved an amendment to its administrative code that reclassifies works that “promote, encourage, or positively depict transgender procedures, gender ideology, or the concept of more than two biological genders” as inappropriate for children and teens. Those titles must now be moved to adult sections of public libraries.

APLS Chairman John Wahl defended the move, saying the change responds to public concerns and strengthens parental authority in communities. “Families across this State spoke clearly … and it’s our responsibility to listen,” Wahl said in a Statement circulated by ALPolitics.com.

The board also heard vocal public comments in October before adopting the rule. Supporters framed it as protecting children’s access, while opponents called it censorship that undermines local decision-making and the First Amendment. One speaker said opponents of change “are not pornography—we are neighbors.”

Critics including Read Freely Alabama and EveryLibrary argue the change amounts to sweeping censorship that forces libraries to alter collections based on politics rather than community needs.

Earlier in 2025, the APLS Board also withheld funding from the Fairhope Public Library over books conservatives said were inappropriate for teen sections, drawing strong community backlash and a successful grassroots fundraising effort to replace lost funds.

Pertinent to both Alabama’s code amendment and Florida’s appeal, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in May 2025 that public libraries may remove books based on content and that patrons do not have a constitutional “right to receive information” from public library shelves. The en banc 10–7 decision, involving the Llano County, Texas library, held that library collection decisions are government speech and not subject to First Amendment challenges.

Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan wrote that “the First Amendment acknowledges no such right” to demand specific books in a library, and noted removed books remain available through other channels.

The Fifth Circuit split with the Eighth Circuit on the issue, increasing the likelihood the U.S. Supreme Court may eventually have to weigh in. Notably, the Supreme Court recently declined to hear an appeal of the Fifth Circuit’s ruling involving book removals in Texas, leaving that ruling in place.