Are libraries permitted to curate book lists?

U-S-_&_World_Page_46.pdf: TX Supreme Court ruled 10-7 that Llano County library can remove 17 books due to their content on race, gender, sexuality and children’s books that contained nudity.  “All Llano County has done here is what libraries have been doing for two centuries: decide which books they want in their collection.”  “Such decisions are very subjective, and it’s impossible to find widespread agreement on a standard to determine which books should or should not be made available.”  According to the majority, the plaintiffs felt “that libraries cannot even remove books that espouse racism.” 

The dissent wrote “Public libraries have long kept the people well informed by giving them access to works expressing a broad range of information and ideas.”  “But this case concerns the politically motivated removal of books from the Llano County Public Library system by government officials in order to deny public access to disfavored ideas.”  The majority “forsakes core First Amendment principles and controlling Supreme Court law.”  “Because I would not have our court ‘join the book burners, I dissent.”

I side with the majority here.  This clearly is NOT book-burning.  It is the library's responsibility to reflect the community's standards.   The plaintiffs should ask the library to create an appeal process.  If the library is unwilling to do so, they should seek a law.  The policy/law might work as follows:

1. The library will make a book available (or unavailable) if a majority of voters express their desire for that book to be available (or unavailable).
2. If [30%] of the number of voters sign a petition to request that a book be made (un)available and the library refuses to do so or fails to act within a year, that book will be voted upon in the next election (but not sooner than [6] months).  (CT: the percentage required has to be high enough to dissuade rampant activity and to make it likely that the voters would agree.)
3. Each book on the vote list will require a separate response from the voter.
4. When the public has voted to make a book available or ban a book from the library, the library will comply for at least [10] years.  (CT note: the library has to regain discretion eventually.)
5. A book that has been voted upon cannot be reconsidered by voters for another [3] elections unless the library reverses the (un)availability or at least [50%] of voters sign a petition.

The Wall Street Journal link below describes many publishers refusing to publish a book by an award-winning author because that author was not the right race to author that book.  I find that objectionable, and it affects the book's availability not just its availability through public libraries.  My first inclination was that the publisher can choose what to publish.  The author in this case was able to find another publisher, and it is relatively easy to self-publish these days.   However, on further thought, this seems to be a situation of racial discrimination.

https://www.wsj.com/arts-culture/books/why-my-new-novel-about-racial-conflict-ran-into-trouble-53a53f54?st=XotXic&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink  

Some minority authors say publishers won't publish their books if their writing is not related to their experience.  The following links might be of interest to you.

Diversity Syndrome: On Publishing’s Relentless Pigeonholing of Black Writers ‹ Literary Hub

Should Authors Write Characters Outside Their Race? - The Good Men Project

I wrote a book about Black queer joy and pain. It's already been banned in 10 states