THE LEGISLATURE on Friday sent to Gov. Maura Healey’s desk legislation that establishes guidelines for how schools and public libraries make decisions about the availability and appropriateness of books.
“Together we are setting forth a bill to protect free expression and intellectual curiosity and every person’s right to free expression. Massachusetts has long been a national leader in education and learning. We are home to the nation’s first public library and first public school. In this commonwealth, we have long appreciated that unabridged access to knowledge is a key to finding opportunity and fulfillment,” Sen. Julian Cyr said during Thursday’s Senate session when the chamber advanced the legislation. “This legislation builds on that proud longstanding tradition by ensuring that decisions about library collections are made by trained professionals through a transparent process, not by political pressure or intimidation.”
The bill (S 3241) outlines criteria for school library teachers to use while determining whether materials are appropriate for a library including whether it is age appropriate, serves an educational purpose and is “based on the teacher’s or employee’s professional training and not on personal, political or doctrinal view.” Employees responsible for library materials can still remove items that are outdated or to accommodate new items.
Attempts to ban books, largely ones dealing with race, gender and LGBTQ+ identities, have been on the rise across the country. In 2025, 4,235 different titles were challenged – second to only 2023 when there were 4,240 challenges, according to the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, which noted that not all book challenges are reported. In 2025, 33 public libraries reported formal challenges – more than seven years combined – to materials and 86 libraries faced a total of 3,093 informal challenges, according to the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners.
Under the bill, materials can only be removed from a school library after a vote by the school committee, or board of trustees if it’s a charter school. Before that vote, there must be a public hearing and determination from a review committee that the material “taken as a whole, based on clear and convincing evidence” does not have any educational, literary, artistic, personal or social value or is not age appropriate. Only school employees, parents or guardians or students enrolled in the school can lodge challenges. Students, parents and guardians may also appeal a decision to remove materials from the library to court.
Residents of the municipality where a free library is located may challenge the selection of materials. And if materials are removed, that decision can be challenged by the material’s author or creator or residents of the municipality.
Employees are protected from retaliation based on their selection of library materials so long as their decision was made “in good faith” and followed the required criteria.
“At a time when the loudest and most extreme voices too often dominate, this bill helps ensure that libraries will remain quiet spaces where curiosity is encouraged, knowledge is accessible, and free expression is protected across the Commonwealth,” Rep. John Francis Moran of Boston, House sponsor of the bill, said in a press release.
The bill also directs school districts, charter schools and local education agencies to file an annual report with Department of Elementary and Secondary Education including information on all complaints and challenges seeking to remove or restrict materials. The Board of Library Commissioners is also required to file a similar report with the Legislature.
The House enacted the legislation on a 152-1 vote and senators enacted the bill on a voice vote. Rep. John Gaskey cast the sole vote against enacting the bill. Gaskey, a Carver Republican, in June spoke about his ill-fated amendment to repeal a provision shielding schools, libraries, employees and others from being convicted for sharing materials that are harmful to minors.
“We know what this bill is all about. That the ideological activists have decided to attack local school boards for simply daring to protect children from state-sponsored pornography. The outcome of this vote, I know, has already been preordained by our leadership, and we know exactly what the orders have said for you guys to do,” Gaskey said at the time. “But I did not run for this office to sit here quietly while the body systematically strips away parental rights and protects government employees from the very laws that every ordinary citizen must follow.”
