North Dakota Governor Kelly Armstrong has vetoed a state bill that sought to limit access to books containing “explicit sexual material” for minors in public and school libraries. In his veto statement, Governor Armstrong described Senate Bill 2307 as “a misguided attempt to legislate morality through overreach and censorship.” He further emphasized that the legislation would place “vague and punitive burdens” on professionals, potentially leading to unintended negative consequences for community institutions like libraries.
The proposed bill aimed to define “explicit sexual material” as content harmful to minors, with a portrayal of nudity or figures exploiting lust or perversion for commercial gain. It threatened librarians and libraries with severe penalties, even suggesting that those who carry such books could face class B misdemeanors which entail up to 30 days in jail or a $1,500 fine, as outlined in the state’s legal code. Armstrong argued that the bill’s enforcement mechanism creates a complex procedure, where complaints about books could spiral into criminal prosecutions and financial repercussions.
Armstrong’s decision aligns with recent judicial attitudes across the United States. In March, a US federal judge halted the enforcement of an Iowa law mandating the removal of books with descriptions of sex acts from schools. These efforts to limit library content have included titles such as “The Diary of a Young Girl” by Anne Frank and “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee.
Cody Schuler, the Advocacy Manager for the American Civil Liberties Union of North Dakota, praised Armstrong’s veto. Schuler stated, “Everyone should have the freedom to read,” commending the governor for supporting individual choice over governmental restrictions. For Schuler’s full statement, visit the ACLU’s release.
Although the bill narrowly passed the state legislature, it remains uncertain whether the North Dakota Senate will achieve the 2/3 majority required to override the governor’s decision. The legislative history of the bill can be followed through LegiScan.
For an in-depth overview of the veto and its implications, refer to the JURIST article.