1. Trump Returns

There’s no ignoring this elephant in the room. Though Donald Trump never specifically talked about libraries on the campaign trail, his reelection in November portends a whole new level of uncertainty for the library community in 2025.

First and foremost, funding battles now loom large. In his first term, Trump proposed the elimination of all federal library funding in every budget proposal, as well as the elimination of the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). Those proposals will surely be on the table again given the administration’s promise to slash trillions from the federal budget. Trump also oversaw the dismantling of net neutrality during his first term. Meanwhile, in July, political action group EveryLibrary highlighted the numerous threats to libraries contained within the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025—which many believe is a blueprint for Trump’s second term.

In 2017, Trump’s first term in office was greeted by marches and protests. But things feel different this time around. Perhaps people are exhausted by the past decade of divisive political battles, but there’s a sense of acquiescence ahead of Trump’s second inauguration—something Trump himself acknowledged during a December 16 press conference. “The first term, everybody was fighting me,” Trump said. “In this term, everybody wants to be my friend.”

It’s also worth noting that Carla Hayden’s 10-year term expires in 2026, meaning Trump will get to appoint the next Librarian of Congress.

2. Government Speech?

In 2024, freedom-to-read advocates notched several legal victories over book banners, but as 2025 gets underway, a key legal question still looms large: whether library book decisions are “government speech, and thus immune from First Amendment challenges, as several would-be book banners have argued.

In August, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in its review of a publisher-led lawsuit seeking to block Iowa’s book banning law, SF 496, soundly rejected the idea that the government speaks through the books school librarians and educators choose to make available. But just weeks later, lawyers for rural Llano County, Tex., cited the same government speech argument in urging the Fifth Circuit to reverse its own holding in Campbell v. St. Tammany Parish School Board, a 1995 decision that has long served as an anti-censorship bulwark for librarians. And several judges on the Fifth Circuit, most visibly the conservative judge Stuart Kyle Duncan, appeared eager to oblige.

In their counterargument, attorneys for the plaintiffs—a coalition of library users who successfully sued Llano County in 2022 over book bans—warned that finding book decisions to be government speech would turn libraries “from institutions of knowledge and education” into “political institutions." In his initial decision finding for the plaintiffs, federal judge Robert Pitman acknowledged that county officials have wide latitude when it comes to selecting materials for their libraries, but, citing the Fifth Circuit's holding in Campbell, found that "removal decisions are subject to the First Amendment" and "are evaluated based on whether the governments’ 'substantial motivation in arriving at the removal decision' was discriminatory."

In several recent book banning cases courts have thus far easily dismissed the government speech argument made by book banners. In addition to Iowa, federal judge judge Timothy L. Brooks eviscerated the the argument in his July 2023 decision to block parts of Arkansas's Act 372. The public library "is not to be mistaken for simply an arm of the state,” Brooks wrote, concluding that "by virtue of its mission to provide the citizenry with access to a wide array of information, viewpoints, and content, the public library is decidedly not the state’s creature; it is the people’s.”

Meanwhile, in Escambia County, Florida, judge T. Kent Wetherell expressed skepticism about the argument being made in an ongoing publisher-led suit over the banning of certain books from the county's school libraries. "The Court simply fails to see how any reasonable person would view the contents of the school library (or any library for that matter) as the government’s endorsement of the views expressed in the books on the library’s shelves," the Trump appointee wrote in a January decision allowing the case to proceed.

A decision in the Fifth Circuit's review of the Llano County case is expected to come at any moment. And freedom to read advocates warn that the stakes are sky high. If the Fifth Circuit somehow abandons its own 30 year-old precedent, a precedent that has never proved controversial, it could have major implications on other freedom to read litigation going forward.

3. Freedom-to-Read Laws Pass in Several States

On Dec. 9, more than three years after she became a target of abuse from book banners, high school librarian Martha Hickson (now retired) found herself in a much better place: standing alongside New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy as he signed the state’s Freedom to Read Act into law.

With the bill signing, New Jersey joined several states that have now passed laws to protect the freedom to read including Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, and Vermont. The bills all feature fairly similar protections: the N.J. law, for example, requires education boards and governing boards of public libraries in the state to establish and follow clear policies for challenging library materials. And perhaps most importantly, the law protects librarians, library staffers, and educators from civil and criminal liability for their lawful work.

At the signing ceremony, Hickson told attendees of the attacks she endured. “I received hate mail, antagonism from administrators, and calls for my firing and arrest,” she said. “I have even been confronted on the street, and my car was vandalized in January of this year.”

Rather than shrink from the fight, however, Hickson, who was profiled in PW's Freedom to Read issue this fall, stood up. And after speaking on a panel, Hickson said a man approached and introduced himself: New Jersey state senator Andrew Zwicker. The senator asked if there was anything he could do to help. Hickson suggested Zwicker look at Illinois’s pioneering anti-book banning legislation that was, at the time, about to be adopted. That conversation led to New Jersey’s bill, which passed easily this year with 23 bipartisan cosponsors across both houses.

“Martha faced a backlash that no individual should ever experience," Murphy said at the bill signing. "Absolutely none of that is acceptable, and it has no place in our libraries or classrooms.”

4. Individual Librarians Fight Book Banners in Court

In addition to a slew of federal lawsuits over the freedom to read, several individual librarians fought back in 2024 with individual lawsuits.

Among them, in March, Llano County librarian Suzette Baker—who was fired in 2022 for refusing to ban books as ordered by county officials—filed a wrongful termination suit. And in August, a federal judge allowed Baker’s suit to go forward, finding that Baker had plausibly asserted that she was “terminated in part because she advocated for minority groups.”

Baker is represented by Denver-based lawyer Iris Halpern—who in 2023 successfully negotiated a $250,000 settlement for librarian Brooky Parks, and who also represents Terri Lesley, the longtime director of the Campbell (Wyo.) County Public Library, who was also fired for refusing to ban books.

Meanwhile, in November, Louisiana librarian and freedom-to-read advocate Amanda Jones filed a defamation lawsuit in federal court against a New Jersey man accused of falsely attacking her as a “groomer” for her efforts to defend the right to read. “There is perhaps no statement more injurious to an elementary educator than that they ‘sexualize’ children,” the complaint reads.

In an August interview with PW, Halpern conceded that financial awards for librarians who have been unfairly treated would send a message to book banners. But that's not the main takeaway, she said. “We certainly hope library boards across the country will think twice about getting bogged down in litigation because they decided to censor based on some discriminatory, hateful agenda,” Halpern says. “But I think the message here is that people don’t want this.”

5. Mixed Data on Book Challenges

Is this a sign of progress? During Banned Books Week 2024, the American Library Association released preliminary data finding that the number of tracked challenges fell significantly for the first eight months of 2024.

Between Jan. 1 and Aug. 31, 2024, the ALA tracked 414 challenges to censor library materials and services and 1,128 unique titles challenged. That’s down from 695 cases and 1,915 unique titles challenged during the same period last year. ALA reps said the data likely reflects the success of advocacy efforts—including key wins in several lawsuits, and broad anti-censorship programs such as ALA’s Unite Against Book Bans. But on background, several observers also questioned whether political pressure to cut ties with ALA in several red states might also be dissuading some from reporting challenges.

And while there were fewer challenges in 2024 from the previous year, there are still too many. ALA reps point out that book bans still remain far above levels tracked prior to 2020, when an organized political movement first took aim at libraries.

Meanwhile, the ALA’s statistics stand in contrast to data released by PEN America, which found that censorship in school libraries topped 10,000 for the 2023–2024 school year, nearly three times more than the pervious school year, with roughly 80% of the bans recorded by PEN in Florida and Iowa, in reaction to new state laws that broadly target sexual content.

6. Publishers Sue Over Florida Book Bans

In what may be turn out to be one of most consequential lawsuits yet filed in defense of the freedom to read, six major publishers along with the Authors Guild and several bestselling authors teamed up with students and parents in Florida to file a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of two provisions of the state's recently enacted HB 1069. The complaint, filed at the end of August, argues that the vague and overbroad statute has led to the improper removal of hundreds of books from school and classroom libraries in the state.

In the suit’s opening paragraph, the plaintiffs note that classic books including Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings; Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man; Ernest Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls; Zora Neale Hurston’s Their Eyes Were Watching God; Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World; Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye; Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina; Richard Wright’s Native Son; Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughter-House Five; and Alice Walker’s The Color Purple "are some of the many books” removed from school libraries under the law.

“These books are timeless classics, renowned for their literary value,” the suit states. “They have been on the shelves of school libraries for years, and they are not remotely obscene. But Florida has required these books and others to be removed from school libraries under its broad, across-the-board, content-based mandates that forbid consideration of the books’ merit or value.”

The lawsuit seeks two declaratory judgments from the court. The first is that HB 1069’s prohibition on K–12 access to content that “describes sexual conduct” is “overbroad” and thus unconstitutional. The second is a declaration that the new law’s undefined term “pornographic” is either “synonymous” with the “harmful to minors” standard already defined by Florida law, which is appropriately grounded in the Supreme Court’s standard for obscenity, or, if the court finds that’s not the case, a declaration that the term “pornographic” is overly vague and thus unconstitutional.

“The rise in book bans across the country continues to demand our collective action,” the publishers said in a joint statement announcing the suit. “We are unwavering in our support for educators, librarians, students, authors, readers.”

7. PRH Creates New Post to Help Fight Book Bans

No major publisher has been more active in defending the freedom to read than Penguin Random House, and in September, the publisher made an extraordinary move: it created a new senior-level public policy manager role to help fight for the freedom to read, the first in the industry. Rosalie Stewart, most recently manager of grassroots communications for the ALA's Public Policy and Advocacy office, took the job and began work during Banned Books Week.

PRH reps praised Stewart as “a skilled grassroots organizer” with a passion for youth and LGBTQ+ advocacy and “extensive experience working at the federal, state, and local levels on issues including appropriations, intellectual freedom, and voting access.” PRH reps said Stewart will focus on broadening the publisher’s “participation in state and federal legislative efforts, building coalitions, and grassroots organizing,” signaling the publisher’s intent to stake out a more proactive position upstream in the political process to fight book banning and anti-library legislation.

“Based on my own personal experience, I know how important access to books in school and public libraries is,” PRH CEO Nihar Malaviya told PW when asked about the new role. “We want to do whatever we can to support our authors and illustrators, but also the teachers and librarians who have been at the forefront of the battle over the freedom to read.”

8. Internet Archive Copyright Case Ends

After more than four years of litigation, the closely watched copyright case over the Internet Archive’s scanning and lending of library books finally ended in 2024, after Internet Archive reps decided against exercising their last option, an appeal to the Supreme Court.

“While we are deeply disappointed with the Second Circuit’s opinion in Hachette v. Internet Archive, the Internet Archive has decided not to pursue Supreme Court review,” reads a December 4 statement posted on the Internet Archive’s blog. The post added that the IA would continue work with supporters "to advocate for a future where libraries can purchase, own, lend, and preserve digital books.”

With a consent judgment already entered to settle claims in the case, the official end of the litigation triggered an undisclosed monetary payment to the plaintiff publishers, which, according to the Association of American Publishers, will “substantially” cover the publishers’ attorney fees and litigation costs.

The end of the case comes after a three-judge panel of the Second Circuit Court in September delivered a swift and unequivocal decision that unanimously affirmed judge John G. Koeltl’s March 24, 2023, summary judgment ruling, which found the Internet Archive's program to scan and lend print library books to be copyright infringement.

In a statement, AAP reps celebrated what they characterized as a complete legal victory. “After five years of litigation, we are thrilled to see this important case rest with the decisive opinion of the Second Circuit, which leaves no room for arguments that ‘controlled digital lending’ is anything more than infringement, whether performed by commercial or noncommercial actors, or aimed at authorship that is creative or factual in nature,” said AAP president and CEO Maria Pallante, in a statement.

Meanwhile, the Internet Archive’s legal battles are not over. The IA is facing a similar, follow-on suit filed by a group of major record labels over its “Great 78” program, which collects vintage 20th-century 78-RPM recordings, digitizes them, and makes them freely available to the public.

9. ALA Reopens Search for Executive Director

At the ALA Annual Conference in June, interim ALA executive director Leslie Burger told attendees that the association was on track to have a permanent executive director in place by fall. But after reportedly narrowing the search down to two finalists, the ALA executive board in November announced that it had reopened the search for a new executive director.

“This leadership position is critical as we navigate the years ahead,” said ALA president Cindy Hohl in a November 14 release announcing the second search. ALA reps did not put a timeline on the search, saying only that the association “will hire as soon as the right candidate emerges.”

News of the reopened search came on the one-year anniversary of Leslie Burger taking the helm as interim executive director on Nov. 15, 2023, and more than a year after executive director Tracie D. Hall abruptly resigned from her position on Oct. 6, 2023.

10. ALA Kills LibLearnX

After just three years, which included one virtual event and two modestly attended in-person shows, the American Library Association announced in March that it will cease its LibLearnX conference. The January 24–27, 2025, conference set for Phoenix will be the last show.

The decision came just weeks after ALA reported that the second in-person LibLearnX conference, held in Baltimore in January 2023, drew just 2,006 attendees (including 391 exhibitor attendees and 109 virtual attendees), a sharp decline from the 2,659 who attended the first in-person even in New Orleans in 2023.

Conceived to replace the ALA's Midwinter Meeting, the launch of LibLearnX was clearly impacted by the Covid-19 crisis. The inaugural LibLearn X, which had been set for San Antonio, Tex. in January 2022 was forced to go virtual, hardly an ideal start.

Despite modest attendance, however, many librarians told PW the first in-person LibLearnX events in many ways delivered exactly what ALA membership had asked for when the association began reimagining the future of the ALA Midwinter Meeting years ago—fewer meetings, more educational offerings, an engaging program for attendees, and more time to connect with peers.

In a statement, ALA remained noncommittal about any future winter conferences, saying only that the ALA board was “actively thinking about the experiences and value ALA provides to its members.”