Enacts the "freedom to read act"

Showing the cosponsors who are on Agora, A to Z. The official record may list more.

• Democratic41
• Republican1

This bill has cosponsors from more than one party.

Shown in neutral colors by design; Agora is non-partisan.

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Rachel May says this is needed

In recent years, school libraries have increasingly become targets of organized efforts to restrict access to materials based on viewpoint, identity, or political disagreement. These efforts are often framed as concern or protection, but in practice they can function to remove certain ideas or experiences from shared public spaces. Censorship rare- ly announces itself openly. More often, it works through pressure and uncertainty, exploiting unclear rules and fear of controversy. The Freedom to Read Act responds to this moment directly. It affirms that decisions about school library materials should be guided by professional standards and publicly adopted policies, not by political pressure. It ensures that challenges to library materials are handled through fair, transparent procedures that respect community input while safeguarding access to ideas. It makes clear that materials cannot be removed simply because someone disagrees with the ideas they express or the identities they reflect. Clear procedures matter because they make decisions predictable and fair. They give families a defined way to raise concerns and ensure those concerns are addressed consistently. They give educators guidance they can rely on. And they reduce the risk that access to materials turns on pressure, fear of controversy, or uneven treatment across districts. At the same time, this bill respects local governance. Boards of educa- tion retain the authority to adopt policies and make final decisions. Superintendents retain supervisory authority over staff. The bill does not mandate specific titles, viewpoints, or collections. It does not impose uniformity. Instead, it establishes a clear framework so disa- greements are resolved through process rather than pressure. The free flow of ideas is essential to a democratic society. Even in a digital age, many of the ideas that shape how we understand the world still reach us the same way they always have: as words on a page. School libraries are one of the first places where young people encount- er ideas outside an assignment, a classroom discussion, or an adult's explanation. They are places where curiosity leads, where students discover voices, histories, and perspectives they did not already know to seek out. That role matters. A democracy depends on citizens who can encounter unfamiliar ideas, question them, and think critically about what they mean. That process is not always comfortable. But discomfort is some- times necessary for developing the mind. Exposure to ideas is not indoc- trination. Inquiry is not a threat. Students do not become thoughtful participants in civic life by being shielded from complexity, but by learning how to engage it. New York has long recognized this. Our state has a deep tradition of opposing censorship and insisting that ideas be met with discussion rather than suppression. That tradition lives in our public libraries, our schools, and our respect for academic freedom. School librarians are trained professionals whose work is not simply custodial, but intentional. They build collections that support litera- cy, learning, and intellectual growth, guided by professional standards and an understanding of their school communities. Their role is central to education and deserves clarity, respect, and protection. New York's students deserve access to knowledge, not narrowed shelves. Librarians deserve the ability to do their work without fear. Schools deserve guidance that reduces conflict rather than inflaming it. This bill advances all three.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.