Books

The Miami Herald recently "obtained email exchanges among school-district attorneys and the Florida Association of District School Superintendents," displaying the the lawyers' "confusion" over a new bill that places restrictions on which books students can read in schools.

In an op-ed published by the newspaper Tuesday, September 26, The Miami Herald editorial board notes:

Throughout the emails, there was a common warning to educators: Err on the side of caution. This is also one of the recommendations that the state Department of Education offered in its online 'Library Media and Instructional Materials Training.' That might be why Florida led the nation on book bans, accounting for 40% of materials removed from school shelves from July 2022 to June 2023, according to a tally by PEN America, a nonprofit that advocates for freedom of expression. Most books were removed pending a school review.

The editors emphasize, the confusing legislation "is a serious matter because, under Florida statute, librarians and educators could face third-degree felony charges if they 'knowingly' distribute content that's harmful to students."

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again?

Part of the attorneys' confusion, according to the board, is "over the word 'masturbation' — is its mere mention enough to get a book removed?"

The lawyers wondered "whether the new law would hold schools liable for material sold at book fairs held on campuses," the editors write. "They sought clarification on whether a two-letter word in the law — 'or' — meant that all sexual material should be removed, 'even if the book itself, taken as a whole, has serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value and is therefore not obscene/harmful to minors,' John Palmerini, deputy general counsel for the School Board of Orange County, wrote in an email to the Department of Education."

One lawyer said, "if taken to an extreme, House Bill 1467 could justify banning the Bible or any coming-of-age story over sexual references."

The board suggests, "Florida lawmakers, so good at politicking, seem to have forgotten the basics of lawmaking: writing clear policies that the rest of the state can follow," concluding, "If a group of lawyers can't figure out what a law does, that's the sign of one of two things: The Legislature, egged on by Gov. Ron DeSantis, got sloppy and rushed through poorly written bills that didn't get properly vetted. Or vagueness is the intent."

READ MORE: 'Just absurd': Shakespeare is latest casualty of Florida’s book ban law

Miami Herald's full editorial is available at this link (subscription required).

A group of seven Cameron, Missouri residents are demanding that the local school board removes a list of "naughty books" from school library shelves, The Christian Post reports.

"Three of the group's members, Dan Landi, Heath Gilbert and Colleen Hardy, spoke with The Christian Post," according to the report, about their efforts and the roadblocks they encountered," noting that "Gilbert is the only one with a child attending school in the district."

Per The Christian Post, the residents allege that the Cameron R-1 School District, which is located in the Kansas City Metropolitan area, of "misleading them about the presence of what they say are sexually explicit books in school libraries and keeping them in the dark about the process it undertakes to review such materials."

POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again?

Gilbert told the news outlet, "I went to the school district twice, asking how I could get into the library because I was concerned about the books I was seeing in the news, and they stonewalled me and wouldn't give me an answer."

The parents "discussed the most concerning aspects of the books as 'very graphic depictions that read like a textbook of acts of deviant sex, the normalization of sex outside of marriage, pedophilia' as well as 'bestiality' and 'the normalization of drugs' and 'abortion,'" claiming "that there are rape, graphic depictions of violence and 'promotion of racist ideas'" and "grooming" in some of the books.

Cameron R-1 School District Superintendent Matt Robinson said in a statement to The Christian Post, "The district has been in the process of reviewing books via our internal selection and reconsideration process set forth in board policy, in light of the concerns of patrons, bearing in mind not only the criteria in our policy but also the restrictions set forth under RSMo 573.550."

The statement continued, "The district has also utilized its book review committee process under Board of Education policy with regard to specific submitted concerns, but has temporarily suspended that process in order for the board to determine the best course of action for moving forward to ensure first, that parents and guardians have authority to determine what library materials are accessible to their own students, and second, how to ensure that the district is providing appropriate access for students whose parents desire a broader selection of materials."

READ MORE: Missouri Dem. lawmaker blasts state GOP for 'dystopian future' proposal to defund public libraries

According to the report, "The committee in charge of the book reviews, which consists of the high school principal, assistant principal, librarian, an English teacher and a parent from the district, has only reviewed five books in the Cameron High School library so far. Another five are currently under review."

"The committee," The Christian Post reports, "voted 3-2 to retain all five books in the high school library with no restrictions. The committee also voted to allow the library at Cameron Veterans Middle School to retrain three books without restrictions while letting it retain one book with restrictions."

Christian Post reports:

The way each member of the committee voted remains unknown to the public. Gilbert described the secrecy of the committee's vote as a 'violation of the Missouri Sunshine Law,' stressing that 'this should be an open record and the vote should be public record.'

While the concerned citizens have submitted Sunshine Law requests, the school district has insisted that 'the official committee's vote is not subject to our Sunshine Law,' an assertion he characterized as 'not true.' The district later reversed course and promised that committee votes would be 'public record' going forward.

READ MORE: 'Simply stupid': State and local Republicans slammed for shuttering public libraries

The Christian Post's full report is available at this link.

Arkansas Republican State Representative Stephen Meeks' wife Jennifer Meeks is receiving backlash after setting out to replace free neighborhood books with Bibles, Newsweek reports.

Faulkner County Coalition for Social Justice (FCCSJ) recently called out the congressman's wife via Facebook, saying "she has been busy posting about the little free libraries across Faulkner County and the 'group of leftist[s], who are very active in keeping little libraries stocked.'"

Per Newsweek, Meeks took to Facebook to write, "I have been swapping out books in little free libraries for awhile. Recently I have been picking up free Bibles at flea markets and thrift stores. Sometimes I find good devotion books or kids' Bible stories at a good price to add. Or just great books, and a gospel tract is a nice idea too. From what I have seen, a lot of these books and other things don't align with our Christian values. Today I saw a bunch of Pride stuff in one."

READ MORE: 'Get this porn out of our schools': Parent challenges Utah book ban by requesting the Bible be removed

According to the report, "Little Free Library is a nonprofit that promotes neighborhood book exchanges and American literacy through public bookcases that have a 'take a book, share a book' honor system, where people are encouraged to borrow and donate books as they choose."

The GOP leader ran to his wife's defense claiming "her words were being taken out of context and clarified that she did not take out any LGBTQ-related materials in exchange for the bibles she has added to the libraries, nor would she advocate for others to do something similar."

He told Newsweek, "Somebody on the left took that and interpreted it as my wife going all over central Arkansas, pulling Pride books out of these little libraries and replacing them with bibles and nothing is further from the truth. My wife would not do that. She would not advocate for that. She would be opposed to that."

Facebook users slammed Jennifer's efforts under FCCSJ's post, writing, "So conservatives are essentially stealing books they don't like and destroying them. Isn't one of the ten commandments, 'Thou shalt not steal?'"

READ MORE: 'Just absurd': Shakespeare is latest casualty of Florida’s book ban law

Another user wrote, "This upsets me. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that freedom means letting others be free. The hubris and arrogance of assuming your way is 'the right way' is appalling."

Little Free Library Executive Director Greig Metzger told the news outlet, "When an individual removes books from a Little Free Library that don't match up with their personal beliefs, they silence critical voices that deserve to be heard. Sadly, this kind of behavior overwhelmingly targets BIPOC and LGBTQ+ authors. We encourage Little Free Library stewards to curate their book-sharing boxes in a way that best serves their community. We applaud the Little Free Library stewards who offer books that enlighten readers, nurture empathy, and open up a world of diverse perspectives."

Additionally, FCCSJ emphasized in its post, "Keep removing them, Jennifer. We won't stop. We've received $1,000+ to supply our community with food, toiletries, reproductive care items, and naloxone. These materials are saving lives. The lives of queer kids who aren't out to their parents, to the teen that needs Plan B to avoid having a forced pregnancy, to the good neighbor preventing an overdose. The Meeks' voting records and actions speak for themselves. They can remove as many books as they want but we will never stop coming right back there and showing them that love and decency will always win."

READ MORE: 'Restore a biblical standard': Texas mom demands mandating the Ten Commandments in classrooms

Newsweek's full report is available at this link.

Julia Ebner, author of Going Mainstream: How Extremists Are Taking Over, argues in a recent op-ed published by The Guardian that "as segments of the public have headed towards extremes, so has our politics" across the world.

In her op-ed, Ebner — who is based in London, United Kingdom — references the evident rise of far-right extremism within the United States, Germany, Austria and Sweden. However, when it comes to the question she often receives of "why the UK doesn't have a successful far-right populist party," the author replies "because it doesn't need to."

The author points to the fact that "A few years ago, the far-right Britain First claimed that 5,000 of its members had joined the Tory party," which has "increasingly departed from moderate conservative thinking and" turned "more towards radicalism," and that "Conservative MP Daniel Kawczynski was asked to apologise for attending the National Conservatism conference in Rome," which "is well known for attracting international far-right figures such as Italy's Giorgia Meloni, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson and the hard-right US presidential candidate Ron DeSantis."

READ MORE: How Republicans are engineering 'a flood of conspiracy theories' ahead of 2024: report

Despite this, Ebner suggests that we do not "simply have to accept the 'new normal'" of "democracies being taken over by far-right ideologies and conspiracy thinking" and that it is possible "to prevent and reverse the spread of extremist narratives" in a few ways.

The author of The Rage: The Vicious Circle of Islamist and Far-Right Extremism argues, "Ultimately, the next generation will vote conspiracy theorists in or out of power. Only they can reverse our journey towards the digital middle ages."

Ebnerwrites:

Young people should be helped to become good digital citizens with rights and responsibilities online, so that they can develop into critical consumers of information. National school curricula should include a new subject at the intersection of psychology and internet studies to help digital natives understand the forces that their parents have struggled to grasp: the psychological processes that drive digital group dynamics, online engagement and the rise of conspiracy thinking.

The author also suggests "Companies can play an important role in the fight for democratic values," considering, "for example, the Business Council for Democracy tests and develops training courses that firms can offer to employees to help them identify and counter conspiracy myths and targeted disinformation."

READ MORE: 'Imagine being not extreme enough': Far-right House group votes to expel 'RINO' MTG

A researcher at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, Ebner reflects on the time when she once laughed at the "absurdity of" talk about "QAnon, the emerging internet conspiracy movement whose adherents believe that a cabal of Satan-worshipping elites runs a global paedophile network," but now, she notes:

In the US, dozens of congressional candidates, including the successfully elected Lauren Boebert, have been supportive of QAnon. The German far-right populist party Alternative für Deutschland is at an all-time high in terms of both its radicalism and its popularity, while Austria's xenophobic Freedom party is topping the polls. The recent rise to power of far-right parties such as Fratelli d’Italia and the populist Sweden Democrats bolster this trend.

Still, Ebner argues it is both possible and "essential to expose extremist manipulation tactics, call out politicians when they normalise conspiracy thinking and regulate algorithm design by the big technology companies that still amplify harmful content," narratives and ideologies.

READ MORE: Legal experts lay out the parallels between 'mercurial authoritarian' DeSantis and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán

Julia Ebner's full op-ed is available at this link (subscription required).

Right-wing group Moms for Liberty was recently hit with an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) complaint probing "whether Moms for Liberty is a political educational organization," The Guardian reports.

Per The Guardian, the eight-page complaint filed against the "extremist" group by a Michigan attorney "alleges that the rightwing organization is in violation of its 501(c)4 non-profit status," and also questions "if Moms for Liberty is an action organization, raising questions about its participation in political campaigns and active recruitment of school board candidates."

University of Pittsburgh Associate Professor of Law Phillip Hackney told the news outlet he doesn't believe the complaint will go far, but "said he does think the complaint is correct in bringing up the group's intervention in political campaigns."

READ MORE: Top Democrats ignorant of 'extremist' Moms for Liberty despite warnings the group is dangerous

The Guardian reports:

IRS investigations into a 501(c)4 like Moms for Liberty would be 'heavily fact intensive', Hackney said, with an agent reviewing materials and going back and forth with attorneys for 18 months. The IRS has a statute of limitations to complete an investigation within three years, he said. If the group's status is revoked after that time, it probably would not owe back taxes but would reorganize as a taxable, private organization with even less transparency and no prohibitions on political campaigning.

The complaint obtained by the news outlet states, "The promotion of social welfare does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. However, a section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization may engage in some political activities, so long as that is not its primary activity."

The document also emphasizes, "It would be a permissible educational purpose if there were advocating to remove gender discussions from classrooms and schools if there was a balanced presentation of benefits and drawbacks of using a person's preferred pronouns, supporting LGBTQ youth, impacts on children of being 'exposed' to LGBTQ supportive environments. There is not."

During a segment of MSNBC's Inside with Jen Psaki earlier this month, Psaki exposed the group in a scathing report, noting, "As for their claim that they are just a group of concerned, nonpartisan moms who happen to care about liberty, consider this: One of the founders, who's name is notably emitted from its website, is a current Republican school board member, who is married to the now-chairman of the Florida Republican Party. In 2021, he told The Washington Post, "I have been trying for a dozen years to get 20- and 30-year old females involved with the Republican Party. But now Moms for Liberty has done it for me."

READ MORE: 'May not be what you think': Jen Psaki exposes 'unapologetically extreme' Moms for Liberty group

The Guardian's full report is available at this link (subscription required).

Former President Donald Trump lawyer John Eastman is credited for advising author James Scott Bell's 2022 "anti-abortion legal thriller," Deadlock, The Daily Beast exclusively reports.

Known for his role in supporting Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, Eastman is also the former dean of Los Angeles-based Chapman University Law school.

The Beast reports:

The heart of the legal drama in the book—what Eastman is credited with advising—centers on what goes on behind the Supreme Court’s white marble columns.

At an oral argument, the justices take turns posing questions about the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which forbids the government from making laws 'respecting an establishment of religion.'

READ MORE: 'Under close scrutiny': DOJ investigators zero in on ex-Trump lawyer Eastman over fake electors scheme

Furthermore, The Beast notes, "Eastman's role in the book first came to" the news outlet's "attention when Bell last month donated $100 to the disgraced attorney's legal defense fund, which has raised nearly half a million dollars since its inception two years ago."

The author wrote, "Praying for you, John. You helped me with my novel about the Supreme Court years ago. Godspeed."

The Daily Beast contacted Bell, who according to the report "was reluctant to respond to questions about Eastman's role in the book," before later saying "he came up with the plot and legal angles on his own, noting that he's a retired lawyer."

He insisted, "That all came from me."

READ MORE: Donald Trump and John Eastman likely to be on the January 6th panel's criminal referral list

Regarding the plot, The Beast reports "the novel's protagonist is Associate Justice Millicent Mannings Hollander, the Supreme Court's powerful swing vote who gets her life turned upside down when she nearly dies, sees a brief vision of hell, and is forced to confront her new reality while recovering back home in rural California with her Bible-thumping mom."

Additionally, "Capitol Hill is alive with corruption as the president and a powerful senator are scheming to make her chief justice—but only on the condition that she’ll remain a liberal bulwark."

The judge, who goes by Millie, "starts to fall for a Christian preacher in jeans and a leather toolbelt whose 'tanned arms, glistening with perspiration, were strong,' and "She just sits around while he tells her, 'I think our country has fallen into spiritual darkness over the last fifty years. A large part of that has to do with our courts.'

The Beast notes, "This preacher also served time in federal prison for terrorizing abortion providers."

READ MORE: Why disbarment could be the least of MAGA lawyer John Eastman’' problems

According to the report, the former Trump attorney "is the first person whom author James Scott Bell thanks in his acknowledgments," writing, "Professor John Eastman of Chapman University School of Law, former clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas, walked me through much of the Supreme Court's day-to-day operations as well as many of the legal aspects of the novel. One of the 'smart guys,' he is a credit to his students, his school, and the enterprise of American law."

Eastman told The Beast during a phone call that "he doesn't remember reading the book, but said he advised Bell on 'internal workings of the court,' like how cases make their way up the chain and how justices debate issues behind closed doors."

He said, "The plot line seemed interesting,” though "he'd just read a summary of the book on Amazon before the phone call, which he recorded."

According to The Beast, Eastman is "currently on trial against the California bar, which is trying to take away his professional credentials for threatening the nation’s democracy."

READ MORE: Judge slaps down MAGA lawyer John Eastman’s attempt to call 'expert' witness at disbarment hearing

The Daily Beast's full report is available at this link (subscription required).

Conservative group, Moms for Liberty, is set to rent space in Philadelphia's Museum of the American Revolution for an event later this week, and several prominent historical organizations are making their disapproval known, The New York Times reports.

This comes just days after the right-wing organization, known for pushing book bans in schools, issued an apology after including a quote from Adolf Hitler in a newsletter that read, "He alone, who OWNS the youth, GAINS the future," according to the Indianapolis Star.

After receiving significant backlash, NBC reports an Indiana chapter chairwoman, Paige Miller offered a statement, saying, "We condemn Adolf Hitler's actions and his dark place in human history. We should not have quoted him in our newsletter and express our deepest apology."

READ MORE: Indiana Moms for Liberty chapter scrambles to explain why it quoted Hitler in very first newsletter

Per the Times, earlier this month, "dozens of museum employees were calling on the museum to cancel the rental to Moms for Liberty, on the grounds that it undermined the museum's reputation and mission."

The Committee on L.G.B.T.Q. History, according to the report, urged the museum to renege on the rental, calling it "shocking that an organization dedicated to documenting and preserving American history would enter into any relationship with an organization that is so intent upon distorting the American experience."

Additionally, the American Historical Association wrote a letter earlier this week, urging the museum to reconsider hosting the upcoming event, saying, "Moms for Liberty is an organization that has vigorously advocated censorship and harassment of history teachers, banning history books from libraries and classrooms, and legislation that renders it impossible for historians to teach with professional integrity without risking job loss and other penalties."

Referring to the museum, the Organization of American Historians emphasized, "This work and gains that have been made in this space are in many respects fragile, and must be vigorously defended."

READ MORE: Foot soldiers for Ron DeSantis: The right-wing money and influence behind Moms for Liberty

The museum responded to all criticism, according to the report, with a statement that "acknowledged the legitimacy of the employees' concerns, but said it could not discriminate on the basis of a group’s political beliefs, which it called 'antithetical to our purpose.'"

It read: "The Museum of the American Revolution strives to create an inclusive and accessible museum experience for visitors with a wide range of viewpoints and beliefs. Consistent with this mission, we make available after-hours and private rentals to groups that organize legally and safely, including federally recognized 501(c)(4) nonprofit organizations."

Deemed an "extremist" organization by the Southern Poverty Law Center earlier this month, the group rejects criticism from the historians, writing, "We expect our national summit in Philadelphia to be a time of training and empowerment for parents to be more active in their child’s school system. We stand for the rights of parents and against anyone trying to silent [sic] parents who want to speak up on behalf of their child's needs."

Per the Times, the National Council on Public History, and the Berkshire Conference of Women Historians also denounced the event.

READ MORE: School district’s book ban under investigation for potential civil rights violations

The New York Times' full report is available at this link (subscription required). NBC's report is here.

The authors of a beloved children’s book about gay penguin parents, And Tango Makes Three, are suing a Florida school board as well as members of the Florida Board of Education. One of the arguments is that the book, based on a true story, is implied to be obscene by the fact that it’s banned.

The lawsuit was filed Tuesday, by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell, the two authors of And Tango Makes Three, along with six children who wish to read the book and their parents. It challenges Florida’s Parental Rights in Education Law, also known as the “Don’t Say Gay” law. The law bans education on sexual orientation and gender identity through the third grade. Many Florida school districts ban students up to that grade from checking out books with LGBTQ themes from school libraries.

The suit alleges is that the law in question is “vague and overbroad,” thus running afoul of the First Amendment. Lawyers for the plaintiffs argue that removing And Tango Makes Three from public school libraries was illegitimate because the libraries do not follow a specific curriculum.

READ MORE: Drag Queen Story Hour Interrupted by Neo-Nazis Seen in Terrifying Video

“Books in school libraries are, by nature, optional reading. Even if library shelves constituted curriculum, Lake County had no legitimate pedagogical purpose for barring students’ access to Tango,” the lawsuit reads.

And Tango Makes Three tells the true story of Roy and Silo, male penguins at the Central Park Zoo in New York City. The penguins were seen performing mating rituals, and had even attempted to hatch a rock. Zookeepers gave the penguins an egg from a different pair of penguins who were unable to hatch it. With Roy and Silo’s help, the egg hatched into a female penguin chick, Tango.

The suit says that the book “contains no obscenity or vulgarity; and it is factually accurate,” and thus it’s appropriate for schoolchildren in the 4- to 8-year-old age range suggested by the publisher. By keeping it out of the hands of children, the school district is violating the First Amendment rights of the authors based on their viewpoint, the suit says.

“By censoring Tango and barring students below the fourth grade from accessing the book in Lake County public school libraries, Defendants have stripped the Authors’ book of an essential aspect of its communicative value. They have also injured the reputation of the Authors and Tango by implicitly and falsely suggesting that the book contains obscene, vulgar, sexual, or age-inappropriate material that deserved to be banned—contrary to the wholesome, positive and family-friendly content of the book—and have thereby deprived the Authors of more of their target audience and speech rights,” the suit continues.

The students are part of the suit because their “right to receive information” has also been infringed, lawyers argue. The six children, identified only by their initials, all wanted to check out the book from their library at the beginning of the school year, but are prohibited by the law. They would check it out, the suit says, if it were available.

Ironically, this is not the only penguin-related lawsuit over the “Don’t Say Gay” bill. In May, the publisher Penguin Random House—no relation to And Tango Makes Three—sued Florida’s Escambia County School District in Pensacola for removing books “based on ideological objections to their contents or disagreement with their messages or themes.”

Thanks to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, book bans have taken over schools across the Sunshine State in the name of protecting students from a "woke agenda."

For months, educators both in and out of state have spoken out against the governor's attempt to control what kids read. Now, retired Navy officer Wes Rexrode, a 54-year-old single father of a 14-year-old son, is doing the same.

Rexrode, who was aboard the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt on September 11, 2001, voiced his opposition to book bans during a Martin County, Florida school board meeting earlier this week. He explained to The Daily Beast why speaking out matters to him.

READ MORE: 'Drunk with power': Author Judy Blume shreds Ron DeSantis over draconian book bans

This comes after GOP billionaire Thomas Peterffy recently stopped donating to DeSantis specifically in response to the right-wing governor's move to ban books.

Per The Daily Beast, Rexrode told the school board meeting attendees that "I want my son exposed to different ideas and different viewpoints so that he can learn to think critically and not be force-fed somebody else's opinion. We've all been exposed to different opinions. It makes us better, makes us stronger."

He went on to ask the audience, "Remember the Little Rock 9? If those kids could endure a year of people spitting on them and hating them just to go to school, just to get an education, our kids can deal with a little uncomfortableness from Jodi Picoult or Toni Morrison.”

While speaking to The Daily Beast about what led him to publicly oppose DeSantis' book bans, he said, "I started remembering what books meant to me and how they helped me."

READ MORE: GOP donor stops funding DeSantis over book-banning crusade

The retired Navy officer recalled growing up in rural South Carolina, noting, "books got me out of the trailer parks," and that his "parents trusted those educators and the librarians to let me read what I needed to read."

He told The Daily Beast, "And the whole notion of deciding what other people's kids can and cannot read seemed a manifestation of domestic fascism that is too much like what he had spent a decade combating. My philosophy is, 'If something goes against my beliefs, I can't do that.' But increasingly we've seen a lot of, 'If that goes against my beliefs, YOU can't do that. And I'm sorry, but that's not America.'"

Rexrode insisted, "I don't need anyone else telling my son what he can and cannot read. I'm perfectly capable of doing that myself."

Recognizing the importance of allowing his son to "follow his own path," Rexrode added, "I look at my job as a parent as putting up the guardrails. You can't protect him from everything."

Rexrode also reflected on his time in service, recalling, "Religious fanatics, who wouldn't even let women be educated, flew planes into the World Trade Center and my Pentagon. I spent the last decade of my naval career fighting religious fascism abroad. I never thought I'd have to fight it right here in the United States of America."

He noted that "diversity made me stronger" and emphasized that "I didn't sacrifice 21 years of my life to stand idly by while religious fanatics and other fanatics try to impose fascism on my country."

READ MORE: How books can be used to build up America or to divide it

The Daily Beast's full report is available at this link (subscription required).

A billionaire who contributes to Republican campaigns is reportedly halting contributions to Florida Gov. Rick DeSantis in response to the governor's positions on book bans and abortion.

Thomas Peterffy, the founder Interactive Brokers Group Inc., previously said, while he would vote for former President Donald Trump if he's the GOP nominee in 2024, he would do what he can to make sure the party nominates a different candidate. Peterffy reportedly contributed to Trump in the run-up to Trump's 2020 loss.

Now, Peterffy said he and other donors are holding back from supporting DeSantis, who hasn't formally announced his campaign. Peterffy added that they will be withholding all funding for candidates until it's more clear which one could win the general election, Financial Times reported. That report was first picked up by Bloomberg.

"We are waiting to see who among the primary candidates is most likely to be able to win the general, and then put all of our firepower behind them," Peterffy reportedly told the Financial Times.

The report comes one day after Trump brutally mocked DeSantis for getting "outplayed, outsmarted, and embarrassed by Mickey Mouse" and Disney in a tax dispute.

Missouri Republicans want to defund public libraries.

Per Truthout, this comes after librarians challenged a recently proposed GOP-backed law banning "sexually explicit" books from schools and libraries, which has resulted in the elimination of "hundreds of" reads with"LGBTQ characters or racial justice themes," as well as "Holocaust history and human anatomy."

Heartland Signal tweeted a clip of Merideth's speech, writing, "MO State Rep. Peter Merideth (D) on a just-passed GOP budget defunding libraries: 'They actually took out all state aid for public libraries explicitly because librarians are suing over their First Amendment rights ... We are starting to live in a dystopian future from 1984.'"

READ MORE: Openly gay Missouri Republican masterfully stumps anti-LGBTQ bill author

The state congressman is referring to State GOP Rep. Cody Smith's proposed bill, which would cut all funding for public libraries in the state, according to Truthout. The legislation was introduced "after a lawsuit was filed by the Missouri Libraries Association (MLA) in conjunction with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) against a state law that bans certain materials from schools and libraries."

Merideth said, "Often when we tell the public about the things that are getting voted on in here, they think when we, we tell them what happened just today, that's gotta be partisan rhetoric and hyperbole."

He continued, "It's not, these are the things actually passing."

READ MORE: Missouri Supreme Court refuses to disbar lawyer who sexually assaulted his clients

If the legislation is passed next week, Truthout reports:

School officials, including librarians, who are found in violation of the law are subject to fines of up to $2,000 and jail sentences of up to a year.

Merideth emphasized, "we're talking about book bans from the government and then the government being mad at librarians as the threat to our kids and defunding public libraries. That's the real world here today in Republica- led Missouri."

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: 'Scoring cheap political points': Missouri Democrats rip Republican proposal to tax groceries but not guns

Truthout's full report is available at this link.

Internet Archive vowed to appeal after a U.S. district court judge on Friday sided with four major publishers who sued the nonprofit for copyright infringement.

Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, Internet Archives operated a controlled digital lending system, allowing users to digitally check out scanned copies of purchased or donated books on a one-to-one basis. As the public health crises forced school and library closures, the nonprofit launched the National Emergency Library, making 1.4 million digital books available without waitlists.

Hachette, HarperCollins, John Wiley & Sons, and Penguin Random House sued Internet Archive over its lending policies in June 2020. Judge John G. Koeltl of the Southern District of New York on Friday found in Hachette v. Internet Archive that the nonprofit "creates derivative e-books that, when lent to the public, compete with those authorized by the publishers."

"In a chilling ruling, a lower court judge in New York has completely disregarded the traditional rights of libraries to own and preserve books in favor of maximizing the profits of Big Media conglomerates," declared Lia Holland, campaigns and communications director at the digital rights group Fight for the Future.

"We applaud the Internet Archive's appeal announcement, as well as their steadfast commitment to preserving the rights of all libraries and their patrons in the digital age," they said. "And our admiration is shared—over 14,000 people having signed our pledge to defend libraries' digital rights at BattleForLibraries.com this week alone."

Holland continued:

From a basic human rights perspective, it is patently absurd to equate an e-book license issued through a surveillance-ridden Big Tech company with a digital book file that is owned and preserved by a privacy-defending nonprofit library. Currently, publishers offer no option for libraries to own and preserve digital books—leaving digital books vulnerable to unauthorized edits, censorship, or downright erasure, and leaving library patrons vulnerable to surveillance and punishment for what they read.

In a world where libraries cannot own, preserve, or control the digital books in their collections, only the most popular, bestselling authors stand to benefit—at the expense of the vast majority of authors, whose books are preserved and purchased by libraries well after publishers have stopped promoting them. Further, today a disproportionate number of traditionally marginalized and local voices are being published in digital-only format, redoubling the need for a robust regime of library preservation to ensure that these stories survive for generations to come.

A future in which libraries are just a shell for Big Tech's licensing software and Big Media's most popular titles would be awful—but that's where we're headed if this decision stands. No book-lover who wants an equitable and trustworthy written world could find such a future desirable. Accordingly, we plan to organize an in-person action to demand robust ownership and preservation standards for digital books and libraries. For updates on when and where, check BattleForLibraries.com.

More than 300 authors last September signed an open letter led by Fight for the Future calling out publishers and trade associations for their actions against digital libraries, including the lawsuit targeting Internet Archive.

"Libraries saved my life as a young reader, and I've seen them do as much and more for so many others," said signatory Jeff Sharlet. "At a time when libraries are at the frontlines of fascism's assault on democracy, it is of greater importance than ever for writers to stand in solidarity with librarians in defense of the right to share stories. Democracy won't survive without it."

Fellow signatory Erin Taylor asserted that "the Internet Archive is a public good. Libraries are a public good. Only the most intellectually deprived soul would value profit over mass access to literature and knowledge."

Koeltl's ruling came just two days after the American Library Association released a report revealing that in 2022, a record-breaking 2,571 titles were challenged by pro-censorship groups pushing book bans, a 38% increase from the previous year.

Meanwhile, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday passed the so-called Parents Bill of Rights Act, which education advocates and progressive lawmakers argue is intended to ban books and further ostracize marginalized communities.

A Utah parent is asking for the Bible to be eliminated from classrooms, after a GOP lawmaker backed a bill ordering the removal of "pornographic" books from schools, The Salt Lake Tribune reports.

Per Newsweek, the parent's petition was submitted anonymously following the bill's passing in May of 2022.

"Get this PORN out of our schools," the parent wrote in their request, according to The Salt Lake Tribune.

READ MORE: 'We need more politicians reading books': Jamie Raskin blasts GOP for claiming book bans keep kids safe

Hailing the Bible as "one of the most sex-ridden books around," the petition continued, "If the books that have been banned so far are any indication for way lesser offenses, this should be a slam dunk."

The parent also wrote, "Incest, onanism, bestiality, prostitution, genital mutilation, fellatio, dildos, rape, and even infanticide," referring to issues included in the Bible. "You’ll no doubt find that the Bible, under Utah Code Ann. § 76-10-1227, has 'no serious values for minors' because it's pornographic by our new definition."

Local Christian leaders and groups disagree with the parent, along with Republican Rep. Ken Ivory, who according to The Salt Lake Tribune, sponsored the legislation "to remove pornographic books from school libraries."

The lawmaker referred to the parent's ask to nix the Bible from school bookshelves as "antics that drain school resources."

READ MORE: 'Reprehensible' and 'disgraceful': House Democrat scorches GOP book bans and 'Parental Bill of Rights'

The Salt Lake Tribune reports:

The parent points to action by Utah Parents United, a right-leaning group that has led the efforts to challenge books here for being inappropriate. It has largely centered on texts written by and about the LGBTQ community and people of color.

Based on the new Utah law, something is indecent if it includes explicit sexual arousal, stimulation, masturbation, intercourse, sodomy or fondling. According to state attorneys, material doesn’t have to be 'taken as a whole' in those situations or left on the shelf during a review. If there is a scene involving any of those acts, it should be immediately removed.

According to Newsweek, a local youth pastor said, "I've seen pornography and I've read the Bible—and they are different."

READ MORE: 'Fear is not freedom': Centenarian shreds Florida book bans as Nazi behavior

The Salt Lake Tribune's full report is available at this link (subscription required). Newsweek's report is here.

U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) called out the irony of Republicans' efforts to ban books during a recent House floor debate over parental oversight of K-12 schools.

@Acyn shared a clip of the congressman's speech via Twitter, writing, "Raskin is very good at this," referring to his ability to point out the hypocrisy his GOP colleagues are clearly displaying.

The video begins with Raskin saying, "Two years ago, more than 1600 books were banned in the United States of America. Here are three of the key books that the right-wingers have been going after."

READ MORE: Jamie Raskin blasts the GOP's 'moral agnosticism'

The congressman proceeds to hold up a copy of Khaled Hosseini's The Kite Runner, which he said is "about the dangerous fanaticism, authoritarianism, and abuse of the Taliban. A right wing religious fundamentalist movement, all about censorship and repressing women's control over their own bodies and their own fertility."

Next, Raskin shows a copy of The Handmaid's Tale, describing it as "Margaret Atwood's extraordinary dystopian novel about a right wing misogynist movement, which uses high technology and depraved religious ideology to control not only the minds of their followers, but the private and public lives and the fertility of women."

Lastly, "because they have no sense of irony" — he says about the Republican lawmakers — George Orwell's 1984. Raskin continued, "They're always trying to censor this one."

In 2019, George Packer wrote about the sustained "influence" of 1984 for The Atlantic, saying, "It's almost impossible to talk about propaganda, surveillance, authoritarian politics, or perversions of truth without dropping a reference to 1984."

READ MORE: 'Fear is not freedom': Centenarian shreds Florida book bans as Nazi behavior

Raskin emphasized, "We need more politicians reading books in America, and fewer politicians trying to censor books in America."

He continued, "It's amazing to me, to see politicians who oppose a universal violent criminal background check and who defend assault weapons after the massacres at Columbine — after Parkland, Florida; after Sandy Hook in Newtown, Connecticut; after Uvalde; after Santa Fe, Texas; that they are now going to keep America's children safe by banning The Handmaid's Tale and 1984. We can do better for the children of America."

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: 'Reprehensible' and 'disgraceful': House Democrat scorches GOP book bans and 'Parental Bill of Rights'

The Atlantic's full report is available here.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) is being ridiculed for pretending in his book that he was raised in "the midwest," particularly swing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania.

"I was geographically raised in Tampa Bay," the book says, according to excerpts. "But culturally my upbringing reflected the working-class communities in western Pennsylvania and northeast Ohio — from weekly church attendance to the expectation that one would earn his keep. This made me God-fearing, hard-working and America-loving."

Some attacked DeSantis for implying that only people in western PA and NE Ohio went to church weekly. In fact, in many Protestant Christian churches, particularly in the southern states, it's not unusual to go to church twice a week, on Sunday and again on Wednesday, for fellowship gatherings, particularly among youth groups. Choir practice was usually at least one night a week as well.

Writer Sarah Rumpf noted that having grown up in Florida, she knew a lot of hard-working and God-fearing people, despite not growing up in Pennsylvania or Ohio.

The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson had fun with the claim, but he also agreed with Rumpf that it was shocking for the governor to imply that his own state wasn't hard-working or God-fearing.

"The values I learned in Levy County — poaching, meth, and guiding dope planes into isolated logging roads — shaped me," he joked of the north-central Florida county.

"I was geographically raised in Tampa Bay, but culturally my upbringing reflected the royal court at Versailles, with outstanding wigs, elegant discourse, and utter disregard for the seething class oppression necessary to sustain it," Wilson also posted.

"I may have attended both Harvard and Yale, but culturally I identify with the rustics who eat chocolate pudding with their hands," mocked Helen Kennedy, referring to reports that DeSantis has atrocious table manners and ate with his fingers.

Another said something similar: “I was geographically raised in Tampa Bay, but culturally my upbringing reflected a raccoon’s scavenges, where I ate pudding with my fingers and licked out the cup.”

Paul Rudnick explained that the Tampa folks he knows aren't exactly fans of DeSantis.

"I was geographically raised in New Jersey but culturally my upbringing reflected Tampa Bay where everyone calls Ron DeSantis 'that bigoted asshole who eats pudding with his fingers,'" he tweeted.

Matt Johnson cited the "Fresh Prince of Bel Air," saying, 'I was geographically raised in Tampa, but culturally my upbringing reflected West Philadelphia. On the playground is where I used to play, Maxing and relaxing all cool, and shootin some b-ball outside of the school..."

Another follower of Wilson's he retweeted pulled in DeSantis' hate of transgender people.

"So… he was raised one place but identifies as something else…. Hmmmm," said Ryan Sublett

Rep. Anna V. Eskamani explained, "I was geographically raised in Orlando with a cultural perspective that allows me to easily detect BS when I see it."

"I was geographically raised on Coruscant, but culturally my upbringing reflected the working-class water farmers on Tatooine—from toiling long hours under the twin suns to fighting Tusken Raiders. This made me the Force-fearing, rugged individual that I am today," joked Mark Strauss.

"Where'd you grow up?" Everytown's Max Steel asked, going straight to politics. "I was geographically raised in Plurality-of-the-Caucuses, Iowa but culturally my upbringing reflected the working-class communities in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada."

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday kept in place a preliminary injunction against Florida GOP policymakers' school censorship law in what rights advocates celebrated as "an important victory for professors, other educators, and students."

The appellate court denied a request from Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration and higher education officials to block a district judge's injunction that is currently preventing enforcement of the Stop Wrongs Against Our Kids and Employees (WOKE) Act—rebranded by its supporters as the Individual Freedom Act—in the state's public colleges and universities.

DeSantis' Stop WOKE Act "limits the ways concepts related to systemic racism and sex discrimination can be discussed in teaching or conducting training in workplaces or schools," parroting a Trump administration executive order that was ultimately rescinded by President Joe Biden, the ACLU explained last year.

The plaintiffs in one of the relevant cases, Pernell v. Florida Board of Governors, are represented by the national and state ACLU along with the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) and Ballard Spahr, who first filed the federal suit last August—the same day U.S. District Judge Mark Walker, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, issued a separate injunction against the law related to employers.

The new appeals court order upholds the injunction Walker issued in November, which began by quoting George Orwell's novel 1984. Calling the controversial law "positively dystopian," the judge wrote at the time that "the powers in charge of Florida's public university system have declared the state has unfettered authority to muzzle its professors in the name of 'freedom.'"

Leah Watson, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU Racial Justice Program, said Thursday that "the court's decision to leave in place the preliminary injunction is a recognition of the serious injury posed to educators and students by the Stop WOKE Act."

"All students and educators deserve to have a free and open exchange about issues related to race in our classrooms," Watson argued, rather than censored discussions that erase "the history of discrimination and lived experiences of Black and Brown people, women and girls, and LGBTQ+ individuals."

LDF assistant counsel Alexsis Johnson similarly stressed that "institutions of higher education in Florida should have the ability to provide a quality education, which simply cannot happen when students and educators, including Black students and educators, feel they cannot speak freely about their lived experiences, or when they feel that they may incur a politician's wrath for engaging in a fact-based discussion of our history."

The order also pertains to a challenge filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) in September.

"Professors must be able to discuss subjects like race and gender without hesitation or fear of state reprisal," FIRE said Thursday. "Any law that limits the free exchange of ideas in university classrooms should lose in both the court of law and the court of public opinion."

The Stop WOKE Act is part of a nationwide effort by Republican state lawmakers and governors—especially DeSantis, a potential 2024 GOP presidential candidate—to curtail what content can be shared and discussed in classrooms and workplaces.

"Since January 2021, 44 states have introduced bills or taken other steps that would restrict teaching critical race theory or limit how teachers can discuss racism and sexism," according to an Education Week analysis updated on Monday. "Eighteen states have imposed these bans and restrictions either through legislation or other avenues."

ACLU of Florida staff attorney Jerry Edwards warned Thursday that "lawmakers continue to threaten our democracy by attempting to curtail important discussions about our collective history and treatment of Black and Brown communities."

"This is an important step in preserving the truth, civil liberties, and a better future," Edwards said of the 11th Circuit's decision.

Though legal groups welcomed the order, the battle over the law is ongoing. The court will eventually rule on the merits of the case—which DeSantis' press secretary Bryan Griffin highlighted Thursday, adding, "We remain confident that the law is constitutional."

Opponents of the law are also undeterred, as Ballard Spahr litigation department chair Jason Leckerman made clear.

"The movement to restrict academic freedom and curtail the rights of marginalized communities is as pervasive as it is pernicious," he said. "We are proud of the work we have done so far with our partners, the ACLU and Legal Defense Fund, but the fight is far from over. Today, we'll take a moment to savor this result—and then we'll keep working."

This post has been updated with comment from FIRE and Gov. Ron DeSantis' press secretary.