Board of Education v. Pico (p. 1526)

This case concerns the right of the School Board to remove certain books from public schools libraries.

            What does the plurality opinion say? [notice the law of this case is probably Justice White’s opinion that since there were material issues of fact, summary judgement was inappropriate – Justice White expressly states that he is not willing to address the First Amendment issues at this point]:

            “We hold that local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books. . . .”  (p. 1529) 

Is this a case involving viewpoint suppression?

– But note huge exception – books may be removed if the motive is to eliminate due to “educational suitability" or vulgarity.  (p.1528-1529)

            Whose First Amendment rights are we protecting here? Kurt Vonnegut’s? Langston Hughes's? Were they parties to this lawsuit?

            The students “right to receive information and ideas.” (p. 1528)

            Was anyone preventing the students from going to a bookstore to purchase these books or even to the City library where presumably they were available?

            No.

            Suppose the School Board had decided not to purchase the books in the first place for exactly the same reasons.

            Page 1529: “As noted earlier, nothing in our decision today affects in any way the discretion of a local board to choose books to add to the libraries of their schools.”

            Why is it okay to refuse to purchase books the Board dislikes, but not to remove them once they have been purchased?

            Is the right to receive denied any more in the one case than the other?

            If the school makes a mistake in its purchasing, why can't it correct the mistake once it discovers it?

            Suppose a University Art Museum purchases a collection of oil paintings by a great contemporary artist, one whose paintings often deal with contemporary social issues in a way that offends powerful groups in the local community. Perhaps his paintings are deemed to be offensive by the LGBT community because they express a view favoring traditional marriage. Under pressure from these powerful members of the community, the President of the University orders the museum director to remove the paintings from public display and hide them away in storage.

If patrons of the museum sue challenging the decision to remove the paintings from public view, do they have a claim under the plurality's reasoning in Pico?