Anyone following this issue for a while knows that Citizens for a New Louisiana is the only organization on the front lines cleaning up public libraries shelving vulgar cartoon books in the children’s section. While the problem isn’t entirely eradicated in Lafayette, the barriers to the clean-up have now been wholly swept away. Every Lafayette Library Board of Control member has prioritized protecting children’s innocence over any other matter. We’ve been replicating this successful model in different library systems, like Livingston and St. Tammany.
This battle is incredibly tedious. One parish, one library, one shelf, and one book at a time. The fight to clean libraries even extends to vulgar movies. The resources it takes for any organization to manage such an overwhelming project are immense. We’ve done our best with what we have by focusing on one parish at a time. As the Lord told Gideon, “Go with the strength you have… I am sending you!”
However, we need good people like you to partner with us to expand this critical work to other parishes that desperately need our attention. The proponents of smut watch our content and read our articles, so I won’t publish here where we plan to go next. However, at least three have been identified where the director or employees have directly engaged on the wrong side of this issue. We need assistance to tackle them. Will you join us?
Are you ready to help? Here are some more ways you can get involved.
St. Tammany Parish Library update
The St. Tammany Parish Public Library has become the center of a prolonged and heated controversy involving library board appointments, allegations of censorship, and ongoing legal action. Over the past two years, this dispute has unsuccessfully attempted to divide the community over access to information, parental control, and the governance of public institutions.
In June 2022, several parents in St. Tammany Parish voiced concerns after discovering books accessible to minors in the public library that contained sexually explicit material. The issue gained prominence when a Mandeville library branch showcased books promoting sexual concepts. Some residents argued that these books should be moved to a section requiring parental approval for access.
Contrary to some deceptive media reports suggesting efforts to ban books, the concerned residents have made no qualms about their actual goal. That is, to move vulgar books currently interspersed in sections intended for minors to a more appropriate library area, not to remove them entirely. The supposed and self-proclaimed “anti-censorship” champion, Banana Jones, confirmed this. In an interview with Livingston Parish News published on August 26, 2024, Jones committed a Freudian slip that was quite instructive:
[Amanda] Jones pointed out that there have been no “outright book bans” in Louisiana and that the challenges that have been hashed out at recent Library Board meetings have been mostly about where certain books should be appropriately shelved…
This begs an important question: Why does this endless barrage of supposed “anti-censorship” people “fight against book bans” when nothing has been banned? It’s because that incendiary language has an impact.
Library Board Appointments and Legal Challenges
The controversy intensified when our friend Brian Glorioso revealed that the appointments of six library board members were not in compliance with legal requirements. They had been given five-year terms instead of staggered terms ranging from one to five years, as mandated by law. Louisiana Attorney General opinion number 23-0009 confirmed that a reappointment process was necessary to rectify the issue. Further, Louisiana Attorney General Opinion 23-0015 also confirmed that library board members serve at the pleasure of the parish governing authority.
To add some weight to this, Representatives Josh Carlson and Jay Galle teamed up to pass HB974, which allows the parish governing authority to remove library board members (among others) at will. As such, the St. Tammany Parish Council conducted a reappointment process for the library board in May. Of 22 nominees, including the six incumbents, three former board members—Bill McHugh, Rebecca Taylor, and Anthony Parr—were not reappointed. These individuals had previously opposed moving the contested books to a restricted section, advocating for their availability to all patrons, including minors.
Following their removal, McHugh, Taylor, and Parr filed a lawsuit against St. Tammany Parish and, specifically, Council Member David Cougle. The lawsuit alleges that their First Amendment rights were violated and that they were replaced due to their political views. They claim that the reappointment process was a pretext to remove them because of their stance on the library materials.
Legal Proceedings
The lawsuit contends that the former board members were wrongfully “terminated” and subjected to false allegations, including being labeled as part of a political conspiracy to sexualize children and as supporters of providing access to pornography. They are seeking reinstatement to their library board positions and requesting financial relief for damages to their professional reputations.
A significant aspect of the legal battle involves the concept of legislative privilege, which protects certain communications of legislators from disclosure. The plaintiffs requested access to specific documents and recordings, including phone conversations between McHugh and council members. The defendants claimed legislative privilege to withhold these materials.
In an order dated September 19, 2024, Judge Brandon Long ruled that the defendants had not sufficiently demonstrated that the privilege applied, ordering them to produce the requested evidence. However, attorneys for the parish government appealed this decision, which postponed the start of the trial and brought additional complexities to the case.
Library Board Meetings Amid Litigation
A critical and nuanced aspect of the ongoing situation involves the scheduling and canceling library board meetings. Since May 2024, the St. Tammany Parish Library Board of Control has not held any meetings. The cancellations have been attributed to the pending federal court litigation.
According to announcements on the library board’s website:
- The July 22, 2024, regular board meeting was canceled “at the request of counsel for St. Tammany Parish Government in litigation pending in federal court.” Agenda items were deferred to the next scheduled meeting.
- The August 26, 2024, meeting was also canceled due to the ongoing litigation.
- The September 23, 2024, meeting was rescheduled to October 2, 2024, to allow for an in-person presentation by a consultant.
Initially, it appeared that both parties in the lawsuit had agreed, either explicitly or implicitly, to suspend library board meetings until certain legal matters were resolved. However, recent court documents suggest that such an agreement may not have been firmly established.
A telephone status conference on September 18, 2024, revealed that the next library board meeting is set for October 2, 2024. This meeting will be the first since the new board members were appointed in May. The plaintiffs expressed concern that the board’s activities could proceed before their legal challenge is addressed, potentially rendering future court decisions less effective.
Judge Long scheduled a hearing on the plaintiffs’ renewed motion for a preliminary injunction for October 15, 2024. The plaintiffs seek to prevent the library board from conducting meetings until their lawsuit is resolved. However, the scheduled hearing will occur after the October 2 meeting, meaning the board can meet and make decisions before the court can rule on the injunction.
Community Impact
The supporters of the former board members view the attempt to restrict access to certain books as censorship and a violation of intellectual freedom. They argue that libraries should provide access to a wide range of materials (sexual or otherwise) without imposing moral judgments regardless of age appropriateness.
On the other side, a growing number of residents realize that placing books in a section away from children is a reasonable measure to protect minors from inappropriate content. They emphasize parental rights and the responsibility of public institutions to consider community standards.
The controversy has also influenced local politics. In recent parish elections, nine out of fourteen council members were replaced, many campaigning on promises to address the library board issue. The newly appointed board members are considered more conservative and are expected to align with residents advocating for shelving contested materials away from the children’s section.
Current Developments
As of late September 2024, the legal proceedings are ongoing, and tensions remain high. The upcoming library board meeting on October 2 is a focal point, as it will be the first meeting since May and will include the newly appointed members. The board is expected to address agenda items deferred for months, potentially impacting library policies and operations.
The plaintiffs are concerned that the board taking actions before the court rules on the preliminary injunction could undermine their case. They argue that if the board proceeds with meetings and implements changes, the court’s eventual decision could be less meaningful.
Judge Long’s order indicates that the court knows these timing issues. The order also emphasizes the need for all parties to communicate developments promptly to the court, suggesting that previous delays may have resulted from a lack of timely information.
Conclusion
The unfolding events at the St. Tammany Parish Public Library highlight the complexities of balancing free speech, parental control, and community values.
The case serves as a microcosm of national debates on how public institutions should navigate contentious social issues. It also shows the vulgar book proponents’ desperation. Their bully tactics and being forced into the courts (generally perceived as a strategy of last resort) show just how unpopular their position has become.
###
If the people only knew...
We can't change Louisiana if all of her citizens remain in the dark. That's why we carry a flashlight.😉 Everything we do is based on the same core principle: If people really knew what their government was doing, their government would stop doing it! This simple concept fully encapsulates all of our work.
- If people knew their government was sending millions of dollars to woke nonprofits - they'd stop doing it.
- If people knew their government was providing pornographic materials to children - they'd stop doing it.
- If people knew their government was indoctrinating children with sexual and social justice concepts - they'd stop doing it.
- If people knew their government was paying woke activists to change our American culture - they'd stop doing it.
- If people knew their government was funding medical experiments on children - they'd stop doing it.
- If people knew their government was continuing a century-long culture of overspending - they'd stop doing it.
There's a problem, though. The people don't know! That's why Louisiana is stuck in last place on so many metrics. Valarie Hodges recently made this point. She said, "[Citizens for a New Louisiana] works very hard to let the public know what’s happening. Without them and what they do, nobody knows anything except what the elite Leftist media wants them to know. Thank GOD for their answering the call to be our voice to the state."
Louisiana will stay in 50th place as long as her people remain deceived by our Leftist media and agenda-driven "shock jock" organizations. This combination of faux news is continually working to crowd out the truth. Alternatively, Citizens for a New Louisiana is the only organization focused on informing you by finding and packaging the truth into an easy-to-digest format. We don't just think Louisiana is worth saving; we're doing our part to accomplish it, one little bit at a time. Will you answer the call and do your part? Here's the chance to prove it. Partner with the movement that's actually making a difference or chip in monthly so this critical work continues.
If everyone who read this article chipped in just $10 a year, we could double our reach.
