Books Being Banned

Jan 27, 2026

Listen to this episode on

ACLU of Massachusetts featured our case, Vonnegut v. Utah, on their podcast Civil Liberities Minute. Listen now.

Related Content

Court Case
Jan 06, 2026
vonnegut v. utah case graphi
  • First Amendment|
  • +1 Issue

Vonnegut v. Utah

The American Civil Liberties Union of Utah Foundation, Inc. (ACLU of Utah), alongside law firms Parr Brown Gee & Loveless and Spencer Fane, LLC, filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the District of Utah on behalf of the Estate of Kurt Vonnegut, award-winning authors Elana K. Arnold, Ellen Hopkins, and Amy Reed, and two anonymous Utah public high school students. By disregarding the literary value of age-appropriate books and removing them, Utah is trampling on the protections guaranteed by the First Amendment. Utah’s Sensitive Materials Law, originally enacted in 2022 and amended in 2024, requires public schools and their libraries to remove a wide range of literature under unconstitutional, overbroad criteria imposed by the state legislature. Among the books removed are major award-winning and best-selling works, including Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, a National Book Award winner and one of Time Magazine’s “100 Best English-Language Novels,” and Nobel Prize winner Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye. Many of the banned titles target voices that have historically been silenced, authors of color, women, and LGBTQ+ writers. These removals include Khaled Hosseini's The Kite Runner; Elana K. Arnold’s What Girls Are Made Of, a National Book Award finalist; and Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, a Pulitzer Prize nominee whose author received both the National Medal of Arts and the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Press Release
Jan 06, 2026
graphic for back to school showing a student arms holding up a book next to a stack of books.
  • First Amendment|
  • +1 Issue

Vonnegut Estate, Authors, and Student Plaintiffs Take Utah to Court Over the Freedom to Read

In Vonnegut v. Utah, plaintiffs argue that portions of HB29 (Sensitive Material Review Law) are unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the First Amendment.