Abstract

Excerpted From:  Morgan Thomas, Censorship as Segregation: Book Bans and the Return of “Separate but Equal”, 111 Cornell Law Review 871 (2026) (182 Footnotes) (Full Document)

The year is 2021. Parents are riddled with strife over their children learning about white supremacy, “critical race theory” is America’s new buzzword, and 1,648 books have been banned. Of those books, 40% featured protagonists or prominent secondary characters of color, 21% of the titles directly addressed issues of race and racism, and 10% of the titles included themes related to constitutional rights and activism. But how did we get here?

In the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd, mass protests spread across the United States as citizens demanded that the nation confront its racism. In response, Republican lawmakers co-opted the term “critical race theory,” misapplying it to any issue related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. This move emboldened local, state, and national groups to weaponize the term as justification for censoring discussions of race and racism in K-12 schools. What followed was a wave of anti-critical race theory (“anti-CRT”) legislation proposed and enacted across the United States, accompanied by widespread bans of books addressing race and racism in America’s classrooms.

Chief Justice Warren wrote that “[education] is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment.” Therefore, “[the opportunity for an education] where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.” However, contemporary book bans, which disproportionately ban works by authors of color and works discussing racism, deprive students of this cultural awakening, preparation, and environmental adjustment. Furthermore, the act in itself of disproportionately banning these works further marginalizes Black students and students of color. What does it show Black students when books challenging notions of Black inferiority are considered “indoctrination” but books that do not mention Black people or reinforce notions of Black inferiority are considered “education”? What does it demonstrate to students of color when school funding is revoked in schools that have chosen not to comply with book bans? And, what does it mean to these students when these acts are sanctioned by law?

This Note argues that contemporary book bans violate the spirit of Brown v. Board of Education. Through contemporary anti-CRT and anti-Black book bans, Black students and students of color are receiving educational opportunities that are substantially inferior to those available to white students, thereby depriving them of equal protection of the law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. This Note makes the argument in three parts.

Part I distills the key school desegregation cases in America underscoring the importance of “intangible factors” of education in desegregation efforts. Part II surveys contemporary anti-CRT and anti-Black book bans in America to demonstrate that the bans operate as functional equivalents of segregation. Subpart II.A examines contemporary anti-CRT and anti-Black legislation and book bans in the states of Tennessee, Texas, and Florida. Subpart II.B discusses the implications that contemporary anti-CRT and anti-Black book bans have on America’s students in K-12 classrooms including the reimposition of segregation’s harms. Part III presents three solutions to the implications of contemporary anti-CRT and anti-Black book bans on K-12 students via a constitutional approach, civil approach, and policy approach. Ultimately, contemporary anti-CRT and anti-Black book bans violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and book banning in K-12 libraries should be abolished.

[ . . . ]

This Note has demonstrated that contemporary anti-CRT and anti-Black book bans in public schools and libraries significantly threaten educational equity, particularly for Black students and students of color. By disproportionately removing materials that reflect the identities and lived experiences of Black students and students of color while restricting critical conversations about race and racism, these bans perpetuate the educational segregation Brown endeavored to abrogate in overruling Plessy’s “separate but equal” ruling. In view of that, this Note has proposed combining litigation with legislative and grassroots efforts to ensure that intellectual freedoms in America remain protected for all students. While federal action remains uncertain, it is up to the states to protect students’ right to a comprehensive, inclusive education that prepares them to participate in a diverse society. Moreover, it is important to continue to monitor the book bans as more information becomes available.

J.D., Cornell Law School, 2026; B.A., Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2021.