Florida, Texas, and Iowa lead the country in banned books by state, with Florida pulling more than 2,300 titles from school libraries in the 2024–2025 school year alone. The removals are not organic. They trace to a wave of state laws passed since 2023 that require school districts to review and pull materials flagged for sexual content, while nine other states have moved in the opposite direction and passed statutes designed to block politically motivated removals. Where you live now largely determines what sits on a school library shelf.
The States Pulling the Most Books
Florida is far and away the leader. During the 2024–2025 school year, Florida schools removed more than 2,300 books. Hillsborough County alone accounted for over 600 of those. The previous year’s total topped 4,500, so the raw number fell, but the state still bans more books than any other by a wide margin.
Texas ranks second, with roughly 1,800 documented bans in 2024–2025. The removals span large urban districts and small rural ones, and in some cases entire series have come off the shelf rather than individual volumes. One central Texas district removed or restricted more than 1,400 titles across its middle and high schools in a single sweep in mid-2025.
Iowa recorded more than 3,600 removals during the 2023–2024 school year, one of the highest single-year totals in the country. The volume was driven by a statewide mandate that forced districts to audit their collections simultaneously.
Utah works differently. Rather than leaving decisions district by district, the state maintains a single statewide banned list. As of mid-2025, 18 titles sit on it. Nationally, book removals have been documented in roughly 20 additional states, but the activity is heavily concentrated in the states with statutes on the books.
The Laws Driving the Numbers
Florida
Florida’s system runs through Section 1006.28 of the Florida Statutes, expanded significantly by HB 1069 in 2023. Any county resident can formally object to a book in a school library. If the objection cites pornographic content or depictions of sexual conduct as defined in state obscenity law, the book must come off the shelf within five school days and stay unavailable until the challenge is resolved.1Florida Senate. Florida Code Title XLVIII 1006.28 – Duties of District School Board The five-day clock starts when the objection is received, not when a review committee looks at it.
The statute also requires every book to be selected by a certified educational media specialist and forces districts to post their collection development procedures on school websites.1Florida Senate. Florida Code Title XLVIII 1006.28 – Duties of District School Board A parent who disagrees with the board’s final decision can request a special magistrate, paid for by the district, whose recommendation goes to the State Board of Education.2Florida Department of Education. Florida Department of Education Memorandum DPS-2023-90 The law defines “library media center” to include ebooks, so digital collections face the same review as physical shelves.
Texas
Texas passed HB 900 in 2023, known as the READER Act. It required book vendors to rate every title for sexual content before selling to a public school. Titles rated “sexually explicit” would be barred from school libraries, and those rated “sexually relevant” would require written parental consent.3Texas Legislature Online. Texas House Bill 900 – READER Act
In October 2025, a federal district judge permanently enjoined the vendor-rating provisions. The court found that requiring private vendors to adopt state content classifications amounted to compelled speech, that terms like “patently offensive” and “sexually explicit” were unconstitutionally vague, and that the law created an unlawful prior restraint. The state may appeal. For now, the vendor-rating system cannot be enforced, but the separate library standards provisions that govern how districts manage their own collections were not part of the injunction and remain in force.
Iowa
Iowa’s Senate File 496, passed in 2023, requires every school district to keep “only age-appropriate materials” in its library. The law excludes anything containing descriptions or visual depictions of a sex act as defined in Iowa’s criminal code, with narrow exceptions for health curriculum and religious texts.4Iowa Legislature. Iowa Code 256.11 – Educational Standards
A first violation draws a written warning. A second or subsequent knowing violation can send the superintendent or the licensed employee responsible to a disciplinary hearing that may result in professional sanctions.4Iowa Legislature. Iowa Code 256.11 – Educational Standards The law was temporarily blocked, but in April 2026 the Eighth Circuit vacated that injunction, and the provisions are now in effect. The court read the law narrowly, holding that it reaches only materials that specifically describe or depict sex acts defined in Iowa’s criminal statutes.
The practical effect on staff is significant. When a second violation can put your teaching license at risk, pulling any book that draws a complaint becomes the safer choice, whatever a librarian thinks of the book itself.
Utah
Utah’s HB 29, passed in 2024, creates the statewide banned list. A book lands on the list when three or more school districts, or two districts plus five charter schools, independently determine that it qualifies as “objective sensitive material” under state code. Once on the list, the book comes out of every public school library in Utah. Students who personally own a banned title can still bring it to school, but it cannot be assigned for class work.
States Moving the Other Direction
Nine states have passed laws specifically to prevent politically motivated removals: California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington. The structure is broadly similar across them. They prohibit removing books for partisan or discriminatory reasons, require libraries to adopt formal collection development and challenge policies, and in most cases protect librarians from retaliation for following the law.
Illinois was first, with Public Act 103-0100 in 2023. The law ties state library grant eligibility to adopting either the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights or an equivalent written anti-censorship policy. Libraries that don’t comply lose access to state funding. Maryland and Minnesota followed in 2024 with “Freedom to Read” laws that ban removals based on discriminatory motives and require formal challenge procedures. New Jersey’s version took effect in December 2025 and shields librarians from both civil and criminal liability tied to collection decisions.
California passed two laws, in 2023 and 2024, covering both school and public libraries and strengthening protections for library staff. Washington’s 2024 law extends protections to textbooks as well as library materials.
Which Books Are Being Targeted
The challenged titles fall into a few consistent categories. Books with LGBTQ+ characters or that explore gender identity are the single most frequent target. Literature about racial history and systemic inequality is the second major category. Books on sexual health, puberty, and human development round out the core group, especially when they include detailed illustrations or frank language aimed at adolescents.
The most banned titles in 2024–2025 included Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange, Jennifer Niven’s Breathless, Patricia McCormick’s Sold, Malinda Lo’s Last Night at the Telegraph Club, and several titles by Sarah J. Maas. Judy Blume’s Forever and Stephen Chbosky’s The Perks of Being a Wallflower continued to appear on ban lists, and George M. Johnson’s All Boys Aren’t Blue remained one of the most challenged books in the country. Award-winning and classic works are not exempt. Challenges tend to focus on specific passages rather than a book’s overall literary merit.
Where the Courts Have Landed
The foundational case is Board of Education v. Pico, decided by the Supreme Court in 1982. Justice Brennan’s plurality opinion held that school boards “may not remove books from school libraries simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books.”5Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center. Island Trees Sch. Dist. v. Pico by Pico, 457 US 853 (1982) Brennan called the school library “especially appropriate for the recognition of the First Amendment rights of students.”
The catch is that Pico was a plurality, not a majority. It is persuasive but not technically binding on lower courts. Some federal judges have followed it closely, including courts that blocked removals of the Harry Potter series and a novel with LGBTQ+ themes. Others have declined to treat it as controlling, giving school boards wider latitude. The outcome of any given challenge depends on which court hears it and how strictly that court reads Pico.
The permanent injunction against Texas’s READER Act vendor-rating system is the most significant ruling to date. Iowa’s SF 496 went the other way when the Eighth Circuit allowed it to take effect in April 2026 under a narrowed reading. Florida’s HB 1069 also faces active litigation.
What the Federal Government Is Doing
Effectively nothing at the moment. In January 2025, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights rescinded prior guidance that had suggested school book removals could violate students’ civil rights. The department dismissed 11 complaints and six additional pending allegations related to book bans, eliminated the “book ban coordinator” position, and terminated existing resolution agreements with school districts.6U.S. Department of Education. US Department of Education Ends Bidens Book Ban Hoax The department stated that book removal decisions fall under parental and community judgment rather than civil rights jurisdiction.
A proposed federal bill, the Right to Read Act, was introduced in the 119th Congress as S.3365.7Congress.gov. Right to Read Act of 2025 It has not advanced. School library policy is almost entirely a state and local matter right now.
Private Schools
Nearly all of these state laws, on both sides, apply only to public schools and public charter schools. Private schools are generally exempt. Mississippi introduced legislation in 2025 that would have removed the library exemption from obscenity prosecution for both public and private school libraries, but the bill died in committee. Families at private schools are unlikely to encounter state-mandated removal requirements, though individual private schools may set their own content policies.