On December 8, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal in Little v. Llano County, Texas—upholding a Fifth Circuit ruling that empowers public libraries to remove books without violating the First Amendment. This bold stand protects childhood innocence from ideological intrusion.
The case began in rural Llano County, where officials removed 17 books in 2021 after parents raised alarms over content promoting transgender themes, racial division, puberty details, and even crude humor for children—titles like Being Jazz: My Life as a Transgender Teen.
Patrons sued, claiming a First Amendment "right to receive information" required the books' return. A district judge ordered reinstatement, but the Fifth Circuit reversed in a decisive 10-7 en banc ruling.
Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan, writing for the majority, declared: "All Llano County has done here is what libraries have been doing for two centuries: decide which books they want in their collections." He emphasized, "That is what it means to be a library—to make judgments about which books are worth reading and which are not, which ideas belong on the shelves and which do not."
With unflinching clarity, Duncan added: "If a disappointed patron can't find a book in the library, he can order it online, buy it from a bookstore, or borrow it from a friend." And to calm the frenzy: "No one is banning (or burning) books."
By denying review, the Supreme Court has green-lit local authorities across the Fifth Circuit (Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi)—and sent a strong signal nationwide—to remove objectionable and inappropriate material aimed at children if that's what they seek to do.
Libraries engage in "government speech" when curating collections; they are not obligated to platform every viewpoint, including those that confuse biological reality, sexualize minors, or promote needless controversy.
This ruling shields communities from activist librarians and organizations pushing agendas, freeing elected officials and boards to prioritize age-appropriate, morally sound content without fear of viewpoint-discrimination lawsuits.
Though binding only in three states, it inspires bold action elsewhere, directly challenging groups like the American Library Association (ALA), which has long flooded children's sections with transgender and LGBTQ+ titles. The ALA, which blocked me on social media two years ago for calling out their role in this moral erosion, lamented the decision as restricting "intellectual freedom."
Freedom for predators of innocence? No—Christ's warning in Matthew 18:6 (KJV) rings true: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."
Books like Call Me Max—which walks young readers through a boy's "transgender journey," wrestling with bathrooms, names, and adult affirmations—exemplify the poison. This Supreme Court action aligns with fights I've led since 2018, fueling my 2024 North Carolina Lieutenant Governor run.
Days ago, Randolph County's Commissioners (NC) voted 3-2 to dissolve a library board that had clung to "Call Me Max" despite moral bankruptcy. We speakers endured sneers, laughter, and slander. We were called "white supremacists" by smug progressives for upholding biology, logic, and righteousness. Defenders touted every cause except the children's.
My friend Pastor John Amanchukwu has taken this national, bearing the same slurs. That same week, North Carolina's House Oversight Committee confronted Chapel Hill-Carrboro Schools for defying the 2023 Parents' Bill of Rights.
Rep. Brenden Jones demanded accountability; administrators dodged with legalese, but Reps. Brian Echevarria, Jeff McNeely, and Mike Schietzelt exposed defiance with district evidence—prompting mandated compliance reports.
These victories—the Supreme Court's stand, Randolph's reset, Carolina's reckoning—lay bare the left's grim pattern: abortion framed as "rights" and "healthcare," yet the unborn child vanishes from mention; drag story hours thrust upon toddlers, but never the elderly in nursing homes—why this fixation on the young?
Agendas that corrupt innocence, yet howl "bigotry" at any resistance. Disgust burns deep at this defilement, veiled as "inclusion." In Randolph, I heard the tired mantra: "Sex and gender are not the same—gender is a social construct." The same recycled leftist talking points, spoon-fed in the halls of so-called higher education, ignore science, logic, and God's clear design of male and female. This is no mere debate; it is a deliberate assault on truth, targeting moldable minds to normalize confusion.
Yet this plague rages unchecked, intensifying daily—a fierce spiritual warfare for the souls of our children and the destiny of generations unborn. Let no one be deceived by the timid cries of "book banning" from fence-sitters; this is righteous curation, a defiant stand against an ideology forcibly imposed on innocent minds.
Their vaunted "diversity" and "inclusion" are nothing less than a tyrannical demand for unquestioning affirmation—dare to refuse, and you will be branded with hatred, scorn, and slander. Laws and rulings provide vital weapons in the fight, but they cannot win the war alone.
True victory demands a revival of hearts and homes: families rebuilt on the unyielding rock of fierce biblical faith, fortified with the moral strength and godly order of yesterday, so that our nation may yet have a tomorrow worth inheriting.
Rise and fight with holy fire, unyielding and unafraid—the millstone of divine judgment hangs heavy over those who offend these little ones, but triumph and eternal reward await the faithful who refuse to surrender.
