NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WSMV) – In Rutherford County, Friday night football games have long brought communities together, with proud traditions at schools like Riverdale High. But this fall, a different kind of clash is taking place off the court — a divisive battle over whether certain books should be pulled from library shelves.

Since February, the Rutherford County Board of Education has banned 35 books, including popular youth novels such as River, the perks of being a wallflowerand Loved by Nobel Laureate Toni Morrison. These books were available in high school libraries, although none were part of the district’s curriculum.

The book bans were initiated by board member Caleb Tidwell, who flagged the titles as sexually explicit under school board policy and state obscenity laws.

During a board meeting in September, people who support book bans, many from Tidwell’s church, attended and said sexually explicit content was harmful to minors.

“Yes, we’re trying to ban books that contain pornographic material,” one supporter said during public comment.

But not all council members agree. Butch Vaughn, a retired executive, was just recently elected to the board. He grew up in Rutherford County, sent his children to public school here and expressed concern about what he calls “political appreciation.”

“I look at it sometimes as a battle between good and evil, and I’ll always be on the side of good,” Vaughn said. “It’s like it’s really creating dust, and I don’t think this needs to be an issue that separates us and keeps us from focusing on what’s really important.”

Vaughn, who attends the same church as Tidwell, worries about the fallout from the board’s actions and says he thinks it’s a small, vocal minority pushing to ban the books.

“It created so much bitterness, division,” Vaughn said. “If you look at the number of times (banned books) have been checked over the last few years, it’s so minute. I mean, it’s like it creates dust really in a lot of situations.”

Stan Vaught, another new board member and longtime community resident, shares Vaughn’s concerns and fears the book ban is a slippery slope.

“It almost reminds me a little bit of 1930s Germany, where if we get them out of our libraries, where are we going to get them next?” Vaught said. “I can’t tell other parents how to raise their kids and I won’t, it’s not my job.”

Over the summer, lawmakers revised the state law, expanding the definition of obscenity and expanding the types of material now prohibited in school libraries.

Since August, Tennessee school districts have struggled to interpret the law and implement its new requirements.

Despite the ensuing legal confusion during its own board meetings, Rutherford County went ahead and banned six more books under the law after Tidwell challenged them as “sexually explicit.”

“The law can and will be challenged, and I’m sure it won’t survive,” said Ken Paulson, director of the Center for Freedom of Expression at Middle Tennessee State University. “And the reason for that is it takes existing Supreme Court rules and adds new things.”

Paulson says that when it comes to library materials, the changes to the law are so sweeping that any book that contains depictions of sexual behavior or excessive violence is now banned in Tennessee.

“Never in the history of America has the Supreme Court or any federal court concluded that a book was obscene because it had excessive violence,” Paulson said. “And the books banned in Rutherford County are not porn. And the idea that they’re somehow written to capture the same audience as something like that Hustler the magazine is bullshit.”

Both Vaughn and Vaught worry the district is headed for a federal lawsuit that could cost the school district hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend.

“I don’t want my tax dollars, or yours, or anyone else’s, going to defend a frivolous lawsuit when we can avoid it,” Vaught said.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is reportedly considering legal action against the board, and earlier this fall, the board voted to request a legal opinion letter from the state attorney general on how to move forward in according to the new law.

But instead of waiting for that guidance, Tidwell proposed removing ten additional titles, and on Monday fellow board member Frances Rosales flagged another 150 titles under the obscenity law.

WSMV4 Investigates confirmed that Superintendent of Schools James pulled the new list of books from school libraries on Tuesday, with those titles including the novels. Catch-22 and A clockwork orange.

Vaught says he wishes the board would go back to other businesses and return to a time when parents made decisions about the books their children read.

“We have hired experts to run these libraries. My personal belief is that we should yield to them. If a parent doesn’t like a book, don’t let the child check it out.”

Tidwell, who declined an interview, released a statement saying:

“Once the community raised awareness of the content in question, the vast majority of participants in our meetings were in support of removal. Those community members who advocated for removal came from multiple backgrounds, churches, schools, and yet came to the same conclusion – this content violates the law. More precisely, it is common sense and legal. Attempts to hide behind fear of a lawsuit to keep sexually explicit books in schools, an education-focused setting, show a poor understanding of the law or dereliction of duty.

It is offensive to suggest that keeping sexually explicit books in school libraries has no harmful effect on minors and that these fictional books have an educational value that supersedes their sexual exposure.”

The school board will now have 60 days to review the removed books and decide whether they should return to library shelves or be banned outright.

Copyright 2024 WSMV. All rights reserved.