Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
As part of an ongoing effort to eradicate “obscene” and “harmful” books or curricular material from Indiana schools, a new bill floated by Republican lawmakers seeks to expand that ban to include “pornographic” content, too.
House Bill 1195, authored by Rep. David Abbott, R-Rome City, would build on a 2023 law that made it easier for parents and community members to challenge school library materials. Abbott emphasized, however, that current state statute “has shortfalls” that “still allow” students to have access to questionable — or objectionable — materials.
The goal of his bill, Abbott said, “is to narrow the focus to pornographic material” and require any content of that nature to be removed from K-12 public schools entirely.
“There are some artistic things, and there are questionable books, that one person might think, ‘No, that shouldn’t be here,’ because it’s a community standard. But others think it’s OK,” the representative continued. “A lot of the books are being interpreted differently … and what we want to do is keep obscene materials away from children. We want to focus on STEM. We want to focus on getting our children through K-12 — get them prepared for the future.”
Abbott’s bill requires public schools — traditional and charters — to add “pornographic” materials to the list of books and other curricular content that can already be challenged by parents and community members in a particular district.
The lawmaker said the bill additionally intends Indiana’s existing prohibition to include materials used anywhere within a school — applying to school libraries, classrooms, instructional materials or otherwise.
To curtail current discretion afforded to local school personnel over the fate of contested materials, Abbott’s proposal would further mandate that anything found to amount to “pornographic material, obscene matter, or matter harmful to minors … must be removed from the school.”
“Pornographic material” is defined in the legislation as school material that “includes a patently offensive pictorial depiction” or a “patently offensive written depiction” of:
- nudity involving lewd exhibition of the genitals
- nudity involving genitals in an aroused state; or
- sexual conduct, including: masturbation; vaginal sex; oral sex; anal sex; oral-anal sex; the use of sex toys or other objects for sexual gratification; ejaculation; or sado-masochistic abuse.
Abbott filed a similar bill in 2024, but it never got a committee hearing and ultimately died.
Whether his new bill will gain traction in the 2025 session is still to be determined. Republican Rep. Bob Behning, who chairs the House Education Committee where Abbott’s bill is assigned, told the Indiana Capital Chronicle he hadn’t yet reviewed the proposal or decided whether to put it on the hearing schedule.
“I agreed with what we passed in 2023, so I am not thoroughly embedded with (House Bill) 1195,” Behning said.
Expanding existing law
Two years ago, a contentious debate erupted within Indiana’s Statehouse over a bill-turned-law that now requires Indiana school districts to establish procedures for responding to complaints about library material alleged to be “obscene” or “harmful to minors.”
That bill originally had a much broader subjective scope of “inappropriate” material but ultimately lawmakers focused on the longtime legal definition of obscenity.
Districts must review requests at public meetings and hear appeals if necessary. Schools must also maintain public catalogs of library materials.
Beneath the surface of the years-long school library discourse has been contention from Hoosier parents who say their local school boards rejected their challenges of certain materials, leaving books some deem to be “obscene” and “objectionable” accessible to kids in school libraries.
Librarians and other opponents of the new law maintain such materials are not — and haven’t been — present in school libraries, given that librarians already have a duty to vet what’s appropriate.
Obscene material has long been illegal under Indiana code and federal law, and material harmful to minors is unlawful for people under 18 to access. Those terms have very specific definitions in state law — with a high bar to meet.
Outlawed materials must, as a whole:
- describe or represent, in any form, nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, or sado-masochistic abuse
- appeal to the prurient interest in sex of minors
- be patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable matter for or performance before minors
- lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors
Abbott’s bill seeks to build out that criteria out to include “pornographic materials.”
“It’s not banning books,” he said. “And something to remember is — as it was addressed in the Supreme Court — with First Amendment rights, the school is a government entity … and we have control over that. Thus, those rights apply in a different level and magnitude than they do for the general public.”
“We could, for instance, say we want all kids in state of Indiana to wear uniforms,” Abbott added. “We can also say we don’t want them to have those type of books, and it’s for the benefit of their educational needs, not because we have moral, ethical values that we’re trying to instill. We feel that’s already happening. We’re trying to keep them focused on education.”
The bill would specifically apply to “school material” matter — already outlined in state law as “any book, magazine, newspaper, or other printed or written material; any picture, drawing, photograph, motion picture, digitized image, or other pictorial representation; any statue or other figure; any recording, transcription, or mechanical, chemical, or electrical reproduction; or any other articles, equipment, machines, or materials” — that is “made available to students, in any format, by a school for an educational purpose.”
“Performances” count too, and are presently defined in Indiana Code as “any play, motion picture, dance, or other exhibition or presentation, whether pictured, animated, or live, performed before an audience of one or more persons.”
Like in current law, public libraries would not be affected by Abbott’s bill. Any materials approved by a district for “instruction on human sexuality” also would not qualify.
A person who knowingly or intentionally disseminates matter to minors that is harmful to minors can already face a Level 6 felony, which carries a maximum penalty of 2.5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Abbott’s bill would level the same charge for school personnel that knowingly “provide” or “make available” any “pornographic” school material to students.
If charged, an they could still argue that the material has literary, artistic, political or scientific value as a whole, however.
There is no statutory defense currently in state code relating to obscenity. If such materials — such as a pornographic magazine — are being provided to minors, anyone can be prosecuted.
‘Not banning books’
Abbott said his bill has so far earned favor from multiple parents, principals, school board members and teachers. He pointed to additional appetite for the bill among members of the House and Senate Republican caucuses.
“I have a lot of support for this, especially back home and in my district with my constituents. Overwhelmingly, hundreds and hundreds of people have approached me, and so that I’m reacting to that,” he said. “Think of the kids first – that’s my message. We’re not trying to ban books. We’re just trying to put them where they should be — and keep the kids where they should be.”
Without providing specifics, Abbott referenced “some examples,” including “some that are very, very disgustingly graphic,” of school materials he’s been shown that he thinks should be removed from the K-12 educational space.
Although he did not name the particular school district, he described a case when local officials in one Hoosier community reviewed a book challenge and “decided to keep the book,” even though it was found to contain “graphic” content.
“They thought that the three or four pages that had those descriptions of a boy and a girl didn’t affect the overall content of the book,” Abbott noted. “I’ve heard conversations from superintendents that, ‘Well, they’re going to learn it anyway. They might as well learn it now.’ We don’t want to introduce that in our education system. If they find it out on their own, on social media, or wherever, that’s life. But we want to focus on good material for the kids.”
A 2024 investigation by the Capital Chronicle and the Arnolt Center for Investigative Journalism found that book challenges are rare and removal even rarer.
For example, a May 2023 complaint filed with the East Noble School Corporation, in Abbott’s district, argued to administrators that Sherman Alexie’s, “The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian,” belonged in the “garbage” — not on library shelves.
But East Noble’s school board disagreed and denied the request and subsequent appeal to keep the award-winning book in the curriculum. Public records from East Noble did not say why the board opted to keep Alexie’s book.
Abbott said his bill would give concerned locals a better tool to combat “obscene,” “pornographic” and “patently objectionable” materials.
“When we’re focused on education, we want to stay focused on education,” Abbott said. “So, those books that are falling through the cracks, I’m trying to catch those.”
The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.
This story has been updated.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.