Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico

Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico, case (1982) in which the U.S. Supreme Court, for the first time, addressed the removal of books from libraries in public schools. A plurality of justices held that the motivation for a book’s removal must be the central factor in determining constitutionality. If the purpose is purely to eliminate a diversity of ideas for nationalistic, political, or religious reasons, then the action is a violation of the First Amendment. However, if board officials can point to a nondiscriminatory reason for removing books, such as vulgarity or educational unsuitability, then they are granted wide discretion in removing public-school library books.

In 1976 the school board for the Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 in New York removed 11 books from its schools’ libraries, claiming they were “anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic and just plain filthy.” The books included Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut, The Fixer by Bernard Malamud, Go Ask Alice by Anonymous, Black Boy by Richard Wright, and A Hero Ain’t Nothin’ but a Sandwich by Alice Childress. After objections from the school superintendent—who noted that the officials had failed to follow the existing policy for book removal—the board appointed a review committee, which advised that five of the books at issue be kept in the libraries. The board, however, overruled the committee’s recommendation, giving no explanation of its actions, and banned all but 2 of the 11 books. In a press release, the board stated that it was their duty and obligation to “protect the children in our schools from this moral danger.” Steven Pico, a student at the high school, was among those who sought injunctive and declaratory relief, claiming that the school board violated their First Amendment rights.

A federal district court granted the board’s motion for summary judgment on the basis that its motivation stemmed from a “conservative educational philosophy,” which was permissible in light of the wide discretion usually given to school boards. Subsequently, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, pointing out that there was an issue of fact regarding the board’s motives.

Discover how ordinary objects work, and expand your understanding of the familiar.

SIGN UP

" height="20" alt="HEW Logo">

Thank you for signing up!"

Back to homepage

By clicking "Sign Up", you consent to the Britannica Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Britannica Quiz

All-American History Quiz

On March 2, 1982, the case was argued before the Supreme Court. Writing the plurality opinion—which was joined by Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens, and Harry A. Blackmun, though the latter disagreed in part and wrote his own opinion—William J. Brennan emphasized the narrow nature of the court’s holding, limiting it only to the removal of library books and excluding mandatory readings in course curricula. Brennan’s opinion reasoned that local school boards should have substantial discretion in their curriculum choices and that there is an important interest in protecting nationalistic, political, and social values of schoolchildren. Even so, he noted, citing court precedent, students retain some First Amendment rights at school, and those rights were fully implicated in the case. Placing significant value both on the role that school libraries play in the important and free-choice discovery of knowledge and on the right that schoolchildren have in access to information, the court held that a board should not be able to remove books simply because it does not agree with the ideas contained within them.

At the same time, the court created an exception for the removal of library books that are “pervasively vulgar” or those that are “educationally unsuitable.” Insofar as the board appointed but did not follow the recommendation of a review committee and other district employees, Brennan’s opinion argued, there was a possibility that the board acted with unconstitutional intent in removing the books. Accordingly, on June 25, 1982, the court affirmed the order of the Second Circuit and remanded the dispute for further findings of fact. (The Supreme Court reached the necessary five-vote threshold with Byron R. White, who concurred with the judgment.)

Shortly after the Supreme Court’s decision, the school board voted to reinstate the banned books on the condition that any student checking one out had to take home a parental warning. However, the New York attorney general held that such an action broke a law protecting the confidentiality of library records. In early 1983 the board narrowly voted to return the books to the schools’ libraries.