��ݮ��ƵAPP����

In honor of , today we’re reflecting on memorable ��ݮ��ƵAPP���� cases involving access to literature. Access to a diverse literature — and the freedom from the fear of punishment for utilizing that access — is one of the most important educational resources a university can offer its students. ��ݮ��ƵAPP���� proudly defends the students’ right to access literature and professors’ right to assign controversial works.

Crafton Hills College: Trigger warning for graphic novel coursework

In the spring of 2015, a student and her parents pressured Crafton Hills College to add a trigger warning to an English course syllabus on graphic novels.

The family objected to the violent and sexual content the student would be exposed to, including acclaimed works such as “” by Marjane Satrapi, “” by Alison Bechdel, “” by Brian Vaughan, and “” by Neil Gaiman.

In comments to the , the student called the works “garbage” and said she wanted them “eradicated from the system.” In signing up for the class, she said, she “expected Batman and Robin, not pornography.”

This is especially ironic, as most of the iconic Batman graphic novel tradeback collections — including “,” “,” and “” — contain no shortage of sexual and violent content of their own. In other words, well, graphic content.

When Crafton Hills initially agreed to add a trigger warning to the syllabus, FIRE stepped up and wrote to the college warning of the chilling effect “trigger warnings” may pose to academic freedom. In an additional show of support, the National Coalition Against Censorship, the American Association of University Professors, the American Booksellers for Free Expression, the Association of American Publishers, the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, the National Council of Teachers of English, and the PEN American Center sent a urging Crafton Hills to protect academic freedom.

In Crafton Hills’ response to ��ݮ��ƵAPP����’s letter, President Cheryl Marshall, reversed the school’s earlier decision and agreed that the trigger warning mandate “sets an unhealthy precedent and does not encourage free expression of views and speech, particularly in an educational institution.”

South Carolina legislature punishes universities assigning LGBT-themed books

In June of 2014, ��ݮ��ƵAPP���� was dismayed to see then South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley approve a provision in the state’s budget punishing the College of Charleston and the University of South Carolina Upstate for assigning books with LGBT themes as required freshman reading. The books they found objectionable included Bechdel’s “” and “” by Ed Madden and Candace Chellew-Hodge.

The troublesome provision required the two public institutions to spend the same amount of funds spent teaching the LGBT-themed books, on teaching the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers, “including the study of and devotion to American institutions and ideals.”

FIRE wrote to Gov. Haley in March 2014 urging her to avoid punishing academic institutions for their choice of curriculum. Additionally, ��ݮ��ƵAPP���� joined yet another broad coalition — including the National Coalition Against Censorship, the American Association of University Professors, the American Civil Liberties Union of South Carolina, the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, the Association of American Publishers, the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, the Dramatists Guild, the Modern Language Association, and the National Council of Teachers of English — in signing an condemning the budget provision.

FIRE has taken, and will continue to maintain, the position that academic freedom and student expression should not be subject to the whims of legislators.  

Indiana student employee found guilty of ‘racial harassment’ for reading a book

Yes, really.

One of ��ݮ��ƵAPP����’s most memorable cases took place at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis in 2008. We took action after student-employee Keith John Sampson was reported for, and found guilty of, racial harassment for merely reading “” during work breaks.

The charge of racial harassment was especially confounding because the book chronicles the struggle of Notre Dame students to diminish the influence of the KKK in the 1920s and the general decline of the KKK in Indiana.  

Thanks to ��ݮ��ƵAPP����’s involvement, months of back and forth with the university, and extensive media coverage, the ruling against Sampson was . Sampson’s story ultimately went on to be the subject of a from filmmaker Andrew Marcus.

No matter how cliche the old adage “Don’t judge a book by its cover” may sound, as long as cases like this occur, it’s a phrase that we at ��ݮ��ƵAPP���� will be repeating.

To learn more about the history of some of the most frequently banned and challenged books in America, head over to ��ݮ��ƵAPP����’s new Banned and Challenged Books page in our First Amendment Library.