ÂÒÂ×ÄÚÉä

The proposed law has raised concerns about its enforcement, who would be responsible for the criminal liability, the types of materials that would be considered illegal, and its potential impact on libraries and their staff.

Opponents of the bill say it is a “de facto� book ban because, in order to mitigate the risk of prosecution, institutions will simply remove any material that is found to be objectionable by anyone.

Prior to debate Friday, House Speaker Roger Hanshaw, R-Clay, issued a warning that some of the bills up for third reading would elicit an emotional response from members and that House rules would be enforced if debate did not remain centered on the question at hand.

Points of order were called twice during debate of the bill, both in instances in which Democratic members of the House argued that the bill would result in the banning of books.

In opposition to the bill

“We don’t know who gets prosecuted. We don’t have anything in place for that,� Delegate Shawn Fluharty, D-Ohio, said. “It’s a book-banning bill. That’s what it’s doing. It’s squashing the First Amendment.�

After receiving a point of order, Fluharty continued, “If the book is challenged and removed, I would argue, it’s then banned.�

Delegate Evan Hansen, D-Monongalia, also received a point-of-order when he mentioned that the bill would result in the removal of books from library shelves.

“This is going to have a chilling effect that is a de facto book ban,� Hansen said. “It doesn’t explicitly ban books. But in order to mitigate the risk, librarians are going to make different decisions. They’re going to remove books from their shelves so that they — and their employees, and their volunteers, and the board members — are not going to be subject to criminal prosecution and paying for their defense out of their own pockets.�

In West Virginia, the penalty for displaying obscene material to a minor can vary between a felony and a misdemeanor, depending on the specific offense. According to the West Virginia Code, a person convicted of a felony for distributing or displaying obscene matter to a minor can be fined up to $25,000 or confined in a state correctional facility for up to five years.

In support of the bill

Delegate Elliott Pritt, R-Fayette, who is a teacher, said he supported the bill and does not believe it will result in book bans.

“When a bill comes up for a vote, I ask myself three things: Will this protect and help people, or will it hurt people? Is this what the majority of people who elected me, people in the district I represent, would want me to do? And can I live with this,� he said. “This bill, for me, checks all three boxes. It protects kids. I know it’s what my people would want me to do. And I certainly can live with voting yes.�

Pritt said the bill prevents obscene material from being available to children in public spaces.

“I think it’s incredibly important to remember what this bill does and does not do. This bill does not ban books or censor free speech. These books can still be bought by people privately, if they want, if they’re adults,� he said. “We’re not saying they have to be taken off the market. What this bill does do: It stops obscene, pornographic or sexually explicit materials from being available to children in publicly taxpayer-funded spaces.�