The Wyoming House of Representatives on Thursday rejected two proposed amendments to a bill aimed at keeping sexually explicit books out of kids’ sections in public and school libraries — and didn’t vote on two more amendments.
One of those proposed changes may have been a dare.
If it becomes law, House Bill 10 would define “sexually explicit materials” in graphic and anatomical terms, as describing or depicting specific sex acts.
It would require county and school libraries to open a materials-challenge process to residents of the county or district.
And it would let county or school district residents sue if the librarians then fail to purge books found sexually explicit from the children’s section, or in the case of school libraries, from the institution altogether.
Detractors call the bill censorship, and proponents say it protects children. It will have to survive one more reading in the House to cross to the state Senate.
House Minority Floor Leader Mike Yin, D-Jackson, offered an amendment Thursday that, had the body adopted it, would have expanded the bill’s enforcement functions into the private-sector realm of bookstores rather than keeping them focused on public institutions.
It’s not a bad characterization to say he was challenging his fellow lawmakers to a dare, Yin, who opposes the bill, acknowledged in a Thursday text message to Cowboy State Daily.
“If we truly think that there are pornographic materials in our libraries, I don’t know why we’d leave them in children’s sections of bookstores as well,” Yin told the House during Thursday debate. “I don’t think that there are pornographic materials.
"I think that’s actually a way to use that as a reason to put those books in a different place. But, if you believe there are, this is the amendment to keep it out of children’s sections of bookstores as well.”
Yin’s Republican peers didn’t go for the dare.
“Libraries are funded by tax dollars, whereas bookstores are private,” Rep. Joel Guggenmos, R-Riverton, countered. “I don’t think it’s our place to get involved in private entities like that.”
Rep. Art Washut, R-Casper, who has worked with this concept for years as chair of the House Judiciary Committee, said Yin’s amendment isn’t germane to the title of the bill.
Wyoming legislation must be germane to its title.
Reiterating his thoughts about Wyoming already not allowing pornography in children’s sections — public or private — Yin withdrew his amendment.
Yeah We Found Some Issues
Rep. Julie Jarvis, R-Casper, brought an amendment to add sex acts involving animals and extraterrestrials into the bill’s definitions.
That’s because when she started helping school district staffers check books for depictions of sex acts — “guess which books were the biggest culprits, that we had no idea? They’re graphic novels. They’re comic books.”
Jarvis said the “amazing librarians” don’t read comic books often, so no one knew those images were there.
They involved people with animal heads and extraterrestrials “doing things," she said. "And the pictures are disgusting. They’re sexually explicit.”
Jarvis said her own amendment poses a slippery slope, because it could make animal science books taboo if HB 10 passes.
Still, she said, her amendment is not a joke. “It’s a problem. It’s a real problem.”
Jarvis’ amendment contained two more provisions: language to let parents, via written permission, allow their children to access sexually explicit materials; and language barring minors from accessing online library catalogues without parental permission.
The online space doesn’t have shelves, Jarvis said. She voiced concern that librarians would be sued simply by allowing children to access the less-regulated space of online catalogues. And she said that’s becoming the prevalent form of accessing books.
The House rejected that amendment.
Two Kinds Of Lawsuits
Rep. Marilyn Connolly, R-Buffalo, offered another amendment the House rejected, that would have let the library’s determination remain final after the book challenge, and would have removed the lawsuit mechanism in the bill.
In supporting that motion Rep. Ken Chestek, D-Laramie, lamented that the bill only gives families aggrieved by sexually explicit materials’ presence the ability to sue. It doesn’t give families aggrieved by librarians purging books that aren’t sexually explicit that same opportunity.
When Connolly’s amendment failed, Rep. Lloyd Larsen, R-Lander, withdrew a fourth amendment of his own, that would have deleted and replaced Connolly’s amendment with one implementing the lawsuit mechanism Chestek had described.
More About The Bill’s Mission
As House Bill 10 reads Thursday afternoon, it would give the library a chance to send a children’s section book deemed sexually explicit to the adult section and craft a written decision on the challenge within 60 days.
The bill would give county residents a mechanism to sue a library violating that provision, and possibly win damages, costs, fees or other legal remedies.
It would require the libraries that fail to adopt the challenge process to pay $500 for every day they fail to craft it.
On the school library side, the bill would impose an outright ban on sexually explicit materials, and the same lawsuit and penalty provisions for failure to follow the challenge process or implement it, respectively.
Only people living within the relevant school district could challenge books and sue. And the reviewers of the challenged books under this law would be the school board members, who are typically elected officials, rather than an appointed committee like the kind some districts currently use.
This issue exploded into statewide public controversy in 2022 and 2023, as Cowboy State Daily conducted multiple reviews on books in school and public libraries.
Clair McFarland can be reached at clair@cowboystatedaily.com.
