Virginia Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Challenging Sale Of Two Obscene Books

Comment A Virginia judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit by two Republicans seeking to limit how bookstores and public school libraries could distribute two books to minors, shutting down — at least temporarily — an unusual marketing strategy in the campaign to protect students from the literature that conservatives say. not age appropriate. The two books at the center of the suit are “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe, a memoir about identifying as non-binary, and “A Court of Mist and Fury” by Sarah J. Maas, a fantasy novel depicting a dark romance of fairies. Both have caused objections for their sexual material. The lawsuit, filed in Virginia Beach Circuit Court by Del. Tim Anderson (R-Virginia Beach) and congressional candidate Tommy Altman, aimed to prevent the Virginia Beach school system and locations of private bookseller Barnes & Noble from selling the books to children without first obtaining parental consent. In dismissing the lawsuit, Judge Pamela Baskerville concluded that part of Virginia’s state law dealing with obscenity is unconstitutional. The little-known and little-used section of state code around which the Republicans’ lawsuit was built says that any Virginian can file in court to have a book declared obscene and, if a judge agrees, that anyone who then distributes the book is “presumed to know that the book is obscene” and may be held criminally liable. The code is decades old. In her ruling, Baskervill said the law violates the First Amendment by allowing government censorship and assuming that anyone who distributes an obscene book must consciously decide to violate the law, when in fact those people may “not know that a book can to be considered obscene.” The law “imposes a presumption knowingly‘, or knowledge that one’s actions are wrong, Baskervill wrote. In similar reasoning, Baskervill concluded that the law violates the constitution’s due process clause by “authorizing judgment without notice to the parties aggrieved.” “Virginia Code § 18.2-384 is unconstitutional,” Baskerville wrote in her final order in the case. Thus, the case itself is no longer valid and deserves to be dismissed, he wrote. Baskervill, who came out of retirement to rule because the other judges in Virginia Beach recused themselves, also found that the plaintiffs had not proven that either book was obscene under Virginia law. “The petition does not support sufficient facts to support a finding … that the Book is obscene,” Baskervill wrote of both “Gender Queer” and “A Court of Mist and Fury.” In May, Baskervill had found there was “probable cause” to label both books obscene, while the court had arguments in the case. In her order Tuesday ending the case, Baskervill wrote that the finding was “made without the benefit of briefing or argument by the affected parties” and “was made on an incomplete record.” “It’s a snapshot of Thanos,” said Jeff Trexler, interim director of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund who represented Kobabe in the case, of Baskervill’s gutting of her own earlier decision. He added that he believes justice has been served: “The fact is, [‘Gender Queer’] it is not obscene, it is a work of serious, substantial, artistic, literary and political importance… This case should never have been brought and such a case should never be repeated.” Anderson wrote in a statement Tuesday that his client, Altman, is “considering his appeal options” and may turn to “higher court review to definitively answer this question.” He also suggested that they might request “additions to the code from the General Assembly.” Kobabe and Maas did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday. What happens next depends on whether Altman and Anderson decide to appeal. Because First Amendment and due process issues are involved, Trexler predicted, the case could eventually reach the Virginia Supreme Court — and the Supreme Court beyond. For now, Baskervill’s decision, if it continues unchallenged, means that the particular section of Virginia’s obscenity law it found unconstitutional no longer applies in the particular part of the state under the Virginia Beach District Court’s jurisdiction, Trexler said. And that means the two books can be freely sold by the private bookseller Barnes & Noble. However, at least one of the two texts is no longer available in Virginia Beach Public Schools. Around the same time the lawsuit was going through the courts in May, the school board decided to remove all copies of “Gender Queer” from its libraries because of the book’s sexual content. On Tuesday before the judge’s final ruling, Anderson and Altman dropped part of their lawsuit targeting the school system, citing the fact that the district had already removed student access to “Gender Queer.” Kamala Lannetti, an attorney for the Virginia Beach School Board, wrote in a statement that, “at today’s hearing, the School Board argued that the Court lacked jurisdiction over the School Board” because Virginia’s obscenity law “exempts public schools from the application … Proceedings against a book alleged to be obscene’. But, Lannetti wrote, that issue was “resolved” after the plaintiff withdrew — and “the School Board did not take a position on the other arguments before the Court.” Barnes & Noble did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday. Written in graphic novel format, “Gender Queer” follows author Kobabe’s journey from adolescence to adulthood and her emergence as asexual and gender non-binary. The book contains some graphic sexual scenes – for example depictions of oral sex, masturbation and a sexual fantasy that suggests companionship between an apparently teenage youth and an older, bearded man – which have drawn harsh criticism from parents, including claims that the book shows pedophilia . “A Court of Mist and Fury” is the second in Maas’ best-selling Court of Thorns and Roses series, which retells familiar stories and fairy tales, such as “Beauty and the Beast,” from new and different angles. Common Sense Media, the book review website, recommended the text for ages 17 and up, noting that it is “full of sex, witchy charm”. The lawsuit comes amid an unprecedented nationwide curtailment of student reading freedom in the United States. Book challenges and bans reached an all-time high last school year. In the past two years, six states have passed laws mandating parental involvement in book review or making it easier for parents to remove or limit texts at school, while another five states are considering similar legislation. And Republican lawmakers in at least nine states are pushing laws that would require school library databases to block certain types of content. In total, the books they target are mostly written by people of color and for LGBTQ people, according to PEN American and the American Library Association — the latter of which recently found that “Gender Queer” was the most challenged book of 2021.

title: “Virginia Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Challenging Sale Of Two Obscene Books Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-10” author: “Mark Stewart”

Comment A Virginia judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit by two Republicans seeking to limit how bookstores and public school libraries could distribute two books to minors, shutting down — at least temporarily — an unusual marketing strategy in the campaign to protect students from the literature that conservatives say. not age appropriate. The two books at the center of the suit are “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe, a memoir about identifying as non-binary, and “A Court of Mist and Fury” by Sarah J. Maas, a fantasy novel depicting a dark romance of fairies. Both have caused objections for their sexual material. The lawsuit, filed in Virginia Beach Circuit Court by Del. Tim Anderson (R-Virginia Beach) and congressional candidate Tommy Altman, aimed to prevent the Virginia Beach school system and locations of private bookseller Barnes & Noble from selling the books to children without first obtaining parental consent. In dismissing the lawsuit, Judge Pamela Baskerville concluded that part of Virginia’s state law dealing with obscenity is unconstitutional. The little-known and little-used section of state code around which the Republicans’ lawsuit was built says that any Virginian can file in court to have a book declared obscene and, if a judge agrees, that anyone who then distributes the book is “presumed to know that the book is obscene” and may be held criminally liable. The code is decades old. In her ruling, Baskervill said the law violates the First Amendment by allowing government censorship and assuming that anyone who distributes an obscene book must consciously decide to violate the law, when in fact those people may “not know that a book can to be considered obscene.” The law “imposes a presumption knowingly‘, or knowledge that one’s actions are wrong, Baskervill wrote. In similar reasoning, Baskervill concluded that the law violates the constitution’s due process clause by “authorizing judgment without notice to the parties aggrieved.” “Virginia Code § 18.2-384 is unconstitutional,” Baskerville wrote in her final order in the case. Thus, the case itself is no longer valid and deserves to be dismissed, he wrote. Baskervill, who came out of retirement to rule because the other judges in Virginia Beach recused themselves, also found that the plaintiffs had not proven that either book was obscene under Virginia law. “The petition does not support sufficient facts to support a finding … that the Book is obscene,” Baskervill wrote of both “Gender Queer” and “A Court of Mist and Fury.” In May, Baskervill had found there was “probable cause” to label both books obscene, while the court had arguments in the case. In her order Tuesday ending the case, Baskervill wrote that the finding was “made without the benefit of briefing or argument by the affected parties” and “was made on an incomplete record.” “It’s a snapshot of Thanos,” said Jeff Trexler, interim director of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund who represented Kobabe in the case, of Baskervill’s gutting of her own earlier decision. He added that he believes justice has been served: “The fact is, [‘Gender Queer’] it is not obscene, it is a work of serious, substantial, artistic, literary and political importance… This case should never have been brought and such a case should never be repeated.” Anderson wrote in a statement Tuesday that his client, Altman, is “considering his appeal options” and may turn to “higher court review to definitively answer this question.” He also suggested that they might request “additions to the code from the General Assembly.” Kobabe and Maas did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday. What happens next depends on whether Altman and Anderson decide to appeal. Because First Amendment and due process issues are involved, Trexler predicted, the case could eventually reach the Virginia Supreme Court — and the Supreme Court beyond. For now, Baskervill’s decision, if it continues unchallenged, means that the particular section of Virginia’s obscenity law it found unconstitutional no longer applies in the particular part of the state under the Virginia Beach District Court’s jurisdiction, Trexler said. And that means the two books can be freely sold by the private bookseller Barnes & Noble. However, at least one of the two texts is no longer available in Virginia Beach Public Schools. Around the same time the lawsuit was going through the courts in May, the school board decided to remove all copies of “Gender Queer” from its libraries because of the book’s sexual content. On Tuesday before the judge’s final ruling, Anderson and Altman dropped part of their lawsuit targeting the school system, citing the fact that the district had already removed student access to “Gender Queer.” Kamala Lannetti, an attorney for the Virginia Beach School Board, wrote in a statement that, “at today’s hearing, the School Board argued that the Court lacked jurisdiction over the School Board” because Virginia’s obscenity law “exempts public schools from the application … Proceedings against a book alleged to be obscene’. But, Lannetti wrote, that issue was “resolved” after the plaintiff withdrew — and “the School Board did not take a position on the other arguments before the Court.” Barnes & Noble did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday. Written in graphic novel format, “Gender Queer” follows author Kobabe’s journey from adolescence to adulthood and her emergence as asexual and gender non-binary. The book contains some graphic sexual scenes – for example depictions of oral sex, masturbation and a sexual fantasy that suggests companionship between an apparently teenage youth and an older, bearded man – which have drawn harsh criticism from parents, including claims that the book shows pedophilia . “A Court of Mist and Fury” is the second in Maas’ best-selling Court of Thorns and Roses series, which retells familiar stories and fairy tales, such as “Beauty and the Beast,” from new and different angles. Common Sense Media, the book review website, recommended the text for ages 17 and up, noting that it is “full of sex, witchy charm”. The lawsuit comes amid an unprecedented nationwide curtailment of student reading freedom in the United States. Book challenges and bans reached an all-time high last school year. In the past two years, six states have passed laws mandating parental involvement in book review or making it easier for parents to remove or limit texts at school, while another five states are considering similar legislation. And Republican lawmakers in at least nine states are pushing laws that would require school library databases to block certain types of content. In total, the books they target are mostly written by people of color and for LGBTQ people, according to PEN American and the American Library Association — the latter of which recently found that “Gender Queer” was the most challenged book of 2021.

title: “Virginia Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Challenging Sale Of Two Obscene Books Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-20” author: “Mary Ireland”

Comment A Virginia judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit by two Republicans seeking to limit how bookstores and public school libraries could distribute two books to minors, shutting down — at least temporarily — an unusual marketing strategy in the campaign to protect students from the literature that conservatives say. not age appropriate. The two books at the center of the suit are “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe, a memoir about identifying as non-binary, and “A Court of Mist and Fury” by Sarah J. Maas, a fantasy novel depicting a dark romance of fairies. Both have caused objections for their sexual material. The lawsuit, filed in Virginia Beach Circuit Court by Del. Tim Anderson (R-Virginia Beach) and congressional candidate Tommy Altman, aimed to prevent the Virginia Beach school system and locations of private bookseller Barnes & Noble from selling the books to children without first obtaining parental consent. In dismissing the lawsuit, Judge Pamela Baskerville concluded that part of Virginia’s state law dealing with obscenity is unconstitutional. The little-known and little-used section of state code around which the Republicans’ lawsuit was built says that any Virginian can file in court to have a book declared obscene and, if a judge agrees, that anyone who then distributes the book is “presumed to know that the book is obscene” and may be held criminally liable. The code is decades old. In her ruling, Baskervill said the law violates the First Amendment by allowing government censorship and assuming that anyone who distributes an obscene book must consciously decide to violate the law, when in fact those people may “not know that a book can to be considered obscene.” The law “imposes a presumption knowingly‘, or knowledge that one’s actions are wrong, Baskervill wrote. In similar reasoning, Baskervill concluded that the law violates the constitution’s due process clause by “authorizing judgment without notice to the parties aggrieved.” “Virginia Code § 18.2-384 is unconstitutional,” Baskerville wrote in her final order in the case. Thus, the case itself is no longer valid and deserves to be dismissed, he wrote. Baskervill, who came out of retirement to rule because the other judges in Virginia Beach recused themselves, also found that the plaintiffs had not proven that either book was obscene under Virginia law. “The petition does not support sufficient facts to support a finding … that the Book is obscene,” Baskervill wrote of both “Gender Queer” and “A Court of Mist and Fury.” In May, Baskervill had found there was “probable cause” to label both books obscene, while the court had arguments in the case. In her order Tuesday ending the case, Baskervill wrote that the finding was “made without the benefit of briefing or argument by the affected parties” and “was made on an incomplete record.” “It’s a snapshot of Thanos,” said Jeff Trexler, interim director of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund who represented Kobabe in the case, of Baskervill’s gutting of her own earlier decision. He added that he believes justice has been served: “The fact is, [‘Gender Queer’] it is not obscene, it is a work of serious, substantial, artistic, literary and political importance… This case should never have been brought and such a case should never be repeated.” Anderson wrote in a statement Tuesday that his client, Altman, is “considering his appeal options” and may turn to “higher court review to definitively answer this question.” He also suggested that they might request “additions to the code from the General Assembly.” Kobabe and Maas did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday. What happens next depends on whether Altman and Anderson decide to appeal. Because First Amendment and due process issues are involved, Trexler predicted, the case could eventually reach the Virginia Supreme Court — and the Supreme Court beyond. For now, Baskervill’s decision, if it continues unchallenged, means that the particular section of Virginia’s obscenity law it found unconstitutional no longer applies in the particular part of the state under the Virginia Beach District Court’s jurisdiction, Trexler said. And that means the two books can be freely sold by the private bookseller Barnes & Noble. However, at least one of the two texts is no longer available in Virginia Beach Public Schools. Around the same time the lawsuit was going through the courts in May, the school board decided to remove all copies of “Gender Queer” from its libraries because of the book’s sexual content. On Tuesday before the judge’s final ruling, Anderson and Altman dropped part of their lawsuit targeting the school system, citing the fact that the district had already removed student access to “Gender Queer.” Kamala Lannetti, an attorney for the Virginia Beach School Board, wrote in a statement that, “at today’s hearing, the School Board argued that the Court lacked jurisdiction over the School Board” because Virginia’s obscenity law “exempts public schools from the application … Proceedings against a book alleged to be obscene’. But, Lannetti wrote, that issue was “resolved” after the plaintiff withdrew — and “the School Board did not take a position on the other arguments before the Court.” Barnes & Noble did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday. Written in graphic novel format, “Gender Queer” follows author Kobabe’s journey from adolescence to adulthood and her emergence as asexual and gender non-binary. The book contains some graphic sexual scenes – for example depictions of oral sex, masturbation and a sexual fantasy that suggests companionship between an apparently teenage youth and an older, bearded man – which have drawn harsh criticism from parents, including claims that the book shows pedophilia . “A Court of Mist and Fury” is the second in Maas’ best-selling Court of Thorns and Roses series, which retells familiar stories and fairy tales, such as “Beauty and the Beast,” from new and different angles. Common Sense Media, the book review website, recommended the text for ages 17 and up, noting that it is “full of sex, witchy charm”. The lawsuit comes amid an unprecedented nationwide curtailment of student reading freedom in the United States. Book challenges and bans reached an all-time high last school year. In the past two years, six states have passed laws mandating parental involvement in book review or making it easier for parents to remove or limit texts at school, while another five states are considering similar legislation. And Republican lawmakers in at least nine states are pushing laws that would require school library databases to block certain types of content. In total, the books they target are mostly written by people of color and for LGBTQ people, according to PEN American and the American Library Association — the latter of which recently found that “Gender Queer” was the most challenged book of 2021.

title: “Virginia Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Challenging Sale Of Two Obscene Books Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-04” author: “Robert Mccants”

Comment A Virginia judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit by two Republicans seeking to limit how bookstores and public school libraries could distribute two books to minors, shutting down — at least temporarily — an unusual marketing strategy in the campaign to protect students from the literature that conservatives say. not age appropriate. The two books at the center of the suit are “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe, a memoir about identifying as non-binary, and “A Court of Mist and Fury” by Sarah J. Maas, a fantasy novel depicting a dark romance of fairies. Both have caused objections for their sexual material. The lawsuit, filed in Virginia Beach Circuit Court by Del. Tim Anderson (R-Virginia Beach) and congressional candidate Tommy Altman, aimed to prevent the Virginia Beach school system and locations of private bookseller Barnes & Noble from selling the books to children without first obtaining parental consent. In dismissing the lawsuit, Judge Pamela Baskerville concluded that part of Virginia’s state law dealing with obscenity is unconstitutional. The little-known and little-used section of state code around which the Republicans’ lawsuit was built says that any Virginian can file in court to have a book declared obscene and, if a judge agrees, that anyone who then distributes the book is “presumed to know that the book is obscene” and may be held criminally liable. The code is decades old. In her ruling, Baskervill said the law violates the First Amendment by allowing government censorship and assuming that anyone who distributes an obscene book must consciously decide to violate the law, when in fact those people may “not know that a book can to be considered obscene.” The law “imposes a presumption knowingly‘, or knowledge that one’s actions are wrong, Baskervill wrote. In similar reasoning, Baskervill concluded that the law violates the constitution’s due process clause by “authorizing judgment without notice to the parties aggrieved.” “Virginia Code § 18.2-384 is unconstitutional,” Baskerville wrote in her final order in the case. Thus, the case itself is no longer valid and deserves to be dismissed, he wrote. Baskervill, who came out of retirement to rule because the other judges in Virginia Beach recused themselves, also found that the plaintiffs had not proven that either book was obscene under Virginia law. “The petition does not support sufficient facts to support a finding … that the Book is obscene,” Baskervill wrote of both “Gender Queer” and “A Court of Mist and Fury.” In May, Baskervill had found there was “probable cause” to label both books obscene, while the court had arguments in the case. In her order Tuesday ending the case, Baskervill wrote that the finding was “made without the benefit of briefing or argument by the affected parties” and “was made on an incomplete record.” “It’s a snapshot of Thanos,” said Jeff Trexler, interim director of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund who represented Kobabe in the case, of Baskervill’s gutting of her own earlier decision. He added that he believes justice has been served: “The fact is, [‘Gender Queer’] it is not obscene, it is a work of serious, substantial, artistic, literary and political importance… This case should never have been brought and such a case should never be repeated.” Anderson wrote in a statement Tuesday that his client, Altman, is “considering his appeal options” and may turn to “higher court review to definitively answer this question.” He also suggested that they might request “additions to the code from the General Assembly.” Kobabe and Maas did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday. What happens next depends on whether Altman and Anderson decide to appeal. Because First Amendment and due process issues are involved, Trexler predicted, the case could eventually reach the Virginia Supreme Court — and the Supreme Court beyond. For now, Baskervill’s decision, if it continues unchallenged, means that the particular section of Virginia’s obscenity law it found unconstitutional no longer applies in the particular part of the state under the Virginia Beach District Court’s jurisdiction, Trexler said. And that means the two books can be freely sold by the private bookseller Barnes & Noble. However, at least one of the two texts is no longer available in Virginia Beach Public Schools. Around the same time the lawsuit was going through the courts in May, the school board decided to remove all copies of “Gender Queer” from its libraries because of the book’s sexual content. On Tuesday before the judge’s final ruling, Anderson and Altman dropped part of their lawsuit targeting the school system, citing the fact that the district had already removed student access to “Gender Queer.” Kamala Lannetti, an attorney for the Virginia Beach School Board, wrote in a statement that, “at today’s hearing, the School Board argued that the Court lacked jurisdiction over the School Board” because Virginia’s obscenity law “exempts public schools from the application … Proceedings against a book alleged to be obscene’. But, Lannetti wrote, that issue was “resolved” after the plaintiff withdrew — and “the School Board did not take a position on the other arguments before the Court.” Barnes & Noble did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday. Written in graphic novel format, “Gender Queer” follows author Kobabe’s journey from adolescence to adulthood and her emergence as asexual and gender non-binary. The book contains some graphic sexual scenes – for example depictions of oral sex, masturbation and a sexual fantasy that suggests companionship between an apparently teenage youth and an older, bearded man – which have drawn harsh criticism from parents, including claims that the book shows pedophilia . “A Court of Mist and Fury” is the second in Maas’ best-selling Court of Thorns and Roses series, which retells familiar stories and fairy tales, such as “Beauty and the Beast,” from new and different angles. Common Sense Media, the book review website, recommended the text for ages 17 and up, noting that it is “full of sex, witchy charm”. The lawsuit comes amid an unprecedented nationwide curtailment of student reading freedom in the United States. Book challenges and bans reached an all-time high last school year. In the past two years, six states have passed laws mandating parental involvement in book review or making it easier for parents to remove or limit texts at school, while another five states are considering similar legislation. And Republican lawmakers in at least nine states are pushing laws that would require school library databases to block certain types of content. In total, the books they target are mostly written by people of color and for LGBTQ people, according to PEN American and the American Library Association — the latter of which recently found that “Gender Queer” was the most challenged book of 2021.