Issue
Standards for Explicit Sexual Content in Schools
KEY POINTS
- School Boards are legally permitted to create policy setting standards for preventing age-inappropriate sexually explicit content in their curriculum and library.
- The standard ought not be: “As long as this book doesn’t land us in jail for giving it to a minor, the sexually explicit content is welcome in our curriculum or the school library.”
- Written policy protects students, parents, employees, and the school
and ensures better educational content will fill the finite space in curriculum and in libraries. - Schools should prioritize material that provides rich educational value over material that may provide similar value but also has age-inappropriate sexually explicit content.
- Age-Appropriate policies are not directed at viewpoint and are not banning the book from student possession. They are exercising the schools prerogative to determine what to include in its own library and curriculum.
Standards for Sexually Explicit Content in Schools
Schools must engage in line-drawing for age appropriateness of sexually explicit content in their library and curriculum. Criminal laws are one required line prohibiting schools from giving materials to minors in curriculum or library that a court deems pornographic or obscene. But what about sexually explicit content that does not rise to the extremely high bar of criminal law?
School boards are legally permitted to articulate standards that go beyond “would we land in jail for giving this book to a minor?” to prevent other age-inappropriate sexually explicit content in their curriculum and school library. Unfortunately, many schools have no policy standards for sexually explicit material beyond criminal law.
Schools with written age-appropriate standards for sexually explicit materials that differ for elementary, middle, and high schools protect students and ensures better educational content will fill the finite space in curriculum and in libraries.
But such written policies also protect the school’s staff and district from costly litigation. Even without written policy, a school librarian, principal, or school board is permitted to remove a particular title they deem age-inappropriate sexually explicit material. But with written policy standards, the school is less susceptible to baseless allegations that the title was removed for an impermissible viewpoint discriminatory reason.
School employees still have wide discretion to select and purchase books that comport with the age-appropriate standards in written policy set by the school board, and from that universe of materials, parents then have ultimate authority to make additional age-appropriate determinations for their own child and should have authority to restrict certain titles for their own child.
Individuals who desire to see sexually explicit materials in the hands of minors sometimes argue that such policies are “book bans.” Attempts at labeling common-sense school standards as “book bans” have been rejected by courts, most recently in August of 2022 by a federal court in Missouri.
A parent, for example, who wants to buy sexually explicit books for their own child to read are not prevented from doing so by such school policies. School policies setting forth its own age-appropriate standards for sexually explicit content in its own curriculum and school library do not even prohibit a student from bringing their own book to school or from reading it in an appropriate time, such as study hall. But school districts do not have to put such explicit books in their own curriculum or in the school library, and such a decision by the school is not a ban on books.
Such policies treat inappropriate sexually explicit content the same regardless of whether the sexually explicit depictions or descriptions happen to be between straight, gay, or even a lone person. As such the argument made by those who desire to see sexually explicit materials in the hands of minors, that these policies are directed at LGBT people, is false.
Too many schools lack baseline standards regarding sexually explicit content in school libraries. Schools ought to spend the finite time in the day on academic excellence, and sexually explicit content detracts from that. Explicit sexual depictions and descriptions may sell, but refusal to purchase it is no ban. Districts can decide not to buy and stock sexually explicit content. If you are a school board member who desires to implement such a policy, we are glad to assist you.

Related Articles
Brief Filed with the Supreme Court by Lancaster County business and its owners
LANCASTER COUNTY, Pa. — A legal brief was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the appeal of Conestoga Wood Specialties and its owners, the Hahn family, in a case that is being closely watched nationally, along with the case of Hobby Lobby, because...
Take Action to Provide More Parental Freedom in Education
As parents, we want to be able to choose the education for our children and have the government respect those choices. There is currently a bill in the State House that would provide more freedom for parents who choose to homeschool their children. House Bill...
Geneva College Doesn’t Have to Provide Abortifacients, Judge Rules
From the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Geneva College doesn't have to provide its employees with insurance coverage for contraception, abortion-inducing drugs and other "preventive services," under a decision issued Monday by U.S. District Judge Joy Flowers Conti. The...
To Gov. Corbett: HB 300 & SB 300 Still Bad Policy
Governor Tom Corbett's sudden and surprising announcement that he now backs special protections for sexual orientation and gender identity contradicts his campaign promises to oppose such legislation. Not only is he going against his commitment to those who elected...
Colorado Baker Ordered to Bake for Same-Sex ‘Wedding’
From ABCNews.com: A Colorado baker who refused to make a cake for a gay couple has been given an ultimatum by a judge; serve gay weddings or face fines. [...] In his written decision, Spence ordered that Phillips "cease and desist from discriminating" against gay...
PA Marriage Case Set for June
Our Pennsylvania marriage law, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), is now set to go to trial in June, 2014. The ACLU has sued to overturn DOMA, which states that marriage is between one man and one woman. Please pray for this upcoming trial, that the truth will...
Senator Toomey Breaks Promise to Pennsylvania Voters
Senator Toomey Breaks Promise to Pennsylvania Voters, Time for Citizens to Hold Him Accountable It is deeply disappointing and troubling that U.S. Senator Pat Toomey broke his promise to Pennsylvania voters that he would oppose the “Employment Non-Discrimination Act”...
US Senate to Vote on Threat to Religious Freedom Next Week!
Senators Toomey and Casey Scheduled to Vote Dangerous Bill That Threatens Religious Freedom and Conscience Employers know best what qualities or characteristics are relevant to performing a particular job, not the federal government. So why does Congress want to...
