- "Supreme Court: Miami School Can Ban Book on Cuba," by Warren Richey, The Christian Science Monitor, 16 November 2009.
- "Supreme Court Turns Down Cuban Book Case," by Kathleen McGrory, The Miami Herald, 16 November 2009.
- "Supreme Court Will Not Hear Book Banning Case," by Jasmine Kripalani, WFOR-TV CBS4, 16 November 2009.
From The Christian Science Monitor:
School board members in Miami have won their battle to remove a children's book from the shelves of Miami-Dade school libraries because they said the book presented an inaccurate picture of life in Cuba.
On Monday, the US Supreme Court declined to take up the case of "Vamos a Cuba" – the little book that sparked a big controversy over alleged censorship in Miami.
The action lets stand a 2-1 ruling by the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals that the school board's decision to remove the book was not censorship in violation of the First Amendment. Instead, the Atlanta-based appeals court said the school board was seeking to remove the book because it contained substantial factual inaccuracies.
The ALA Opposes Local Communities
Who was fighting that "battle" with the local community? The American Library Association [ALA], of course, besides the ACLU. The ALA had submitted a brief in support of the ACLU's efforts to oppose the local community. I wrote about this in "Humberto Fontova, the Media's 'Book Banning' Claims, and the ALA's Opposition to the 'Right to Apply Accuracy' in Public Schools," 17 February 2009. It amazes me that the ALA, an organization devoted to libraries, would actually oppose local communities and oppose the "right to apply accuracy" in public schools, but it has and it does and it will in your community.
Effects of Freedom from ALA/ACLU Influence
Look how happy is the community that is freed from the influence of groups like and including the ALA—this from The Miami Herald:
Board member Perla Tabares Hantman, who supported removing the book from school libraries, said she was pleased by the news.
"We were right and we prevailed," Hantman said. "This is a great victory for the School Board and for Cuban-Americans."
Humberto Fontova said in a comment to "No 'Vamos a Cuba,'" by George Moneo, Babalú, 16 November 2009:
You mean Cuban-American parents have the same rights as all other American parents?!
According to the American Library Association, over the past two decades, EVERY SINGLE YEAR sees between 400 and 600 such schoolbook protests in the U.S., much of it over material considered "racially insensitive," as when "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" was yanked from an Illinois school library.
In brief, attempted "book bannings'" identical to the one in Miami-Dade, have occurred at a rate of over one a day for the last two and half decades, from sea to shining sea. In most of these incidents the ACLU and the mainstream media have been conspicuously mum.
And this from "Court Won't Get Involved in Book Banning Case," by Laura Wides-Munoz and Jesse J. Holland, Florida AP, 16 November 2009:
Frank Bolanos, a former Miami-Dade school board chair who championed efforts to remove the book, said he was pleased.
"I support the author's right to publish the book as incomplete and defective as it may be," he said, "but we're simply not required to pay for it with taxpayers dollars," he said, although the district already spent money to buy the book. Bolanos said the case sets precedent for districts to back parents' rights in future cases.
ALA Threatened by Case that Sets Precedent for Parental Rights
And there is the biggest threat to the ALA: not only was there no book "banning" or "censorship," like the ALA constantly claims, but "the case sets precedent for districts to back parents' rights in future cases."
One more time, so communities can shake the ALA propaganda out of their heads:
"The case sets precedent for districts to back parents' rights in future cases."
Smell the Fear as the ACLU Senses Losing Censorship Propaganda War
Those opposing local control know this is a bad one for them. Smell the fear from the CBS4 story:
The decision shocked the ACLU and its leaders."Dangerous"? What, that local communities should control local libraries, not the ALA or the ACLU? That ACLU lawsuits can be empty threats? The US Supreme Court denied certiorari on an appellate case that found no censorship, and the ACLU is still crying out about the "battle against censorship"? Maybe what's dangerous is still thinking the ALA/ACLU are authoritative.
"It is a sad day for free speech in our great nation," said JoNel Newman, ACLU of Florida Cooperating Counsel. "This is a dangerous precedent, and a huge leap backwards in the battle against censorship. The aftershocks may be felt in public school libraries across the country. "
Thank You, Cuban-Americans, for Leading the Way for Parents Rights
Cuban-Americans, you have led the way for districts to back parents against ALA/ACLU false claims of banning and censorship. Thank you! As Frank Bolanos said, "Censorship occurs when government refuses to allow people to purchase material, not when it refuses to provide that material at no charge."