Thread by @OccupyLibraries

HEAR THE LIES USED TO S•XUALIZE CHILDREN IN SCHOOLS BY AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION SCHOOL LIBRARIANS. NEARLY EVERY SENTENCE IS A LIE THAT TARGETS KIDS. 🎯

THE MILLER OBSCENITY CASE HARDLY APPLIES TO PUBLIC LIBRARIES, NEVER IN SCHOOL LIBRARIES.

YET ALA TRAINING SAYS YES.

🧵

If the Miller case applied to public + school libraries, then no book would ever be removed from any library.

In reality, books may be removed under the PICO case, even for simply not following library collection policy, etc.

ALA diktat is Miller applies so nothing is removed.

As @Grok says:

No books have been successfully ruled obscene under the Miller test (from Miller v. California, 1973) in U.S. courts. The test’s third prong—requiring a work to lack “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value”—protects virtually all books, and attempts (e.g., recent Virginia cases on Gender Queer and A Court of Mist and Fury) have failed or been dismissed.

The Miller case itself involved ads for books, not rulings on the books. Post-1973 obscenity cases target hardcore porn (videos/magazines), not literary works.

Think about it. Why do libraries have book reconsideration policies/forms in the first place if no book may ever be removed??? Why do they sometimes result in books being removed?

ALA’s Miller case lie is an attempt to stop the removals and get rid of the #1A reconsiderations!

More on the difference between Pico and Miller here, from a real attorney, not a librarian “law for librarians” trainer trained by ALA. ALA leaves out Pico discussing pervasive vulgarity and educational unsuitability that gets books removed from schools.

safelibraries.blogspot.com/2023/01/detail…

Oh look, an ALA lawyer does the training. I should bring her up on ethics charges for lying about the law—my opinion, Theresa Chmara, my opinion.

Some librarian: get me Chmara’s training materials. I bet an RPC rule covers lying 🤥 to help harm kids.

elearning.ala.org/local/catalog/…

Here’s an example of the flat out lying. And if Theresa Chmara wrote this, I’d like to know. The Law For Librarians training discusses the Pico case but only the half truth ALA wants people to hear. Nothing about the half that allows books to be removed—and immediately.

Interesting 🤔. An attorney has rules to follow. Has she failed to live up to those rules?

Rule 8.4(c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct (DC, NJ, PA): conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.

Interesting 🤔.

Might there be aggravating factors? Yes, says Grok. Vulnerability of victim (children) per ABA Standards 9.22(h).

Interesting 🤔.

“Vulnerability of the victim” – aggravating factor under ABA Standards 9.22(h) for lawyer sanctions. Increases severity when victim (e.g., children) is particularly susceptible to harm from misconduct.

Interesting 🤔.

The ALA lies about the Miller case are then replicated by others, such as the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University @FreeSpeechMTSU. It touts in a red banner a “Free First Amendment e-book for educators.” But look 👀 at the Pico case and it’s the same ALA lies.

By the way, the whole point of ALA’s “Freedom to Read Act” it is spreading across America 🇺🇸 is to effectively obliterate Pico, precisely by analyzing it half way and leaving out the part that allows for the removal of books from school libraries. worldlibraryassociation.org/right-to-read-…

ALA wants Miller to “be your North Star” precisely because no book has ever been ruled as obscene, nor will it ever, and each book must be brought before a judge. So never.

Under Pico multiple books may be removed immediately—by a school
superintendent.

See the difference?

If your school policy follows ALA and applies the Miller “as a whole” standard, can’t-just-read-an-excerpt standard, your children are in danger—from public employees called school librarians and from a board defying Pico in favor of ALA that evicerates parental rights.

Read how ALA has been working for over 60 years to eliminate parental rights, because these are the people some school boards rank above the US Supreme Court itself when they ignore Pico—as ALA wants.

drive.google.com/file/d/1PZ2pDh…

Besides, school librarians know there’s “s•xually inappropriate material for minors,” but they are trained by ALA to “reframe” it as DEI diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Here’s the jaw dropping proof:

And here’s Senator Mike Lee playing a video of that so you can see for yourselves.

Seeing ALA say that for yourselves, do you really want to follow the ALA standard instead of the Pico case and local obscenity laws? Let alone common sense.

c-span.org/video/standalo…

See the above? Can you see why ALA will never debate me? Can you see why ALA gets people to sue me for defamation repeatedly? Here are the latest cases intended to silence me, so please follow me—since @ALALibrary would hate that.

randazza.com/lawsuits/jones…

@threadreaderapp unroll