Across America, publishers, libraries, and literary organizations are building a formidable litigation slate to ensure the availability of books in public and school libraries.

With high-profile cases in Utah, Iowa, and Idaho—where PRH v. Labrador is one of two pending suits against a book removal law, Idaho House Bill 710—plaintiffs are coming to the defense of the freedom to read all over the U.S. On January 6, the ACLU of Utah—on behalf of the estate of Kurt Vonnegut, three other authors, and two high school students—filed a complaint to combat book removals under House Bill 29, a “sensitive material review” law. A week later, on January 13, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in two cases against Iowa Senate File 496, which has resulted in the removal of hundreds of titles from school shelves: Penguin Random House v. Robbins, whose plaintiffs include the Big Five publishers and the Authors Guild, and Iowa Safe Schools v. Kim Reynolds, filed by the ACLU on behalf of LGBTQ+ allies.

Meanwhile, Crookshanks v. Elizabeth School District in Colorado, after a preliminary injunction against a “sensitive” book list, is with the 10th Circuit, and E.K. v. Department of Defense Education Activity, in which a Virginia judge ruled that banned books were to be reshelved, is on appeal to the Fourth Circuit.

“Thinking about hot spots, we very quickly come up with a list of states,” says Kasey Meehan, program director for PEN America’s Freedom to Read program. “Activity ebbs and flows. We continue to watch what’s happening in Tennessee,” where PEN America is a plaintiff in Roe v. Rutherford County Board of Education.

Amid the growing number of lawsuits, PEN staff attorney Elly Brinkley noted that “the most important cases for us right now are in the 11th Circuit,” pointing to Peter Parnell v. School Board of Escambia County and Penguin Random House v. Gibson, both in Florida. “They’re both going up on important questions of the right to receive information,” Brinkley said. PEN’s own case against the Escambia County school board is stayed pending the 11th Circuit’s mandates on Parnell and Gibson.

Legal teams also are alert to how judges will weigh the result in Little v. Llano County, the Texas library censorship case. In December, the Supreme Court declined to hear Llano, meaning that—for now—residents of Fifth Circuit states Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi are without First Amendment rights in their public libraries.

Authors Guild general counsel Cheryl L. Davis calls the result a blow to authors, since “libraries are the ways in which authors introduce their works to people.”

American Library Association president Sam Helmick says the ALA is monitoring another Eighth Circuit case, in Arkansas: Fayetteville Public Library v. Murray, in which the Association of American Publishers and the American Booksellers Association are contesting an effort to regulate libraries and bookstores.

But Helmick points to Lesley v. Campbell County in Wyoming, where library director Terri Lesley won a settlement for her wrongful termination after refusing to censor books, as a sign of hope amid the “doom and gloom.” Lesley’s success, Helmick says, sets a precedent that there are legal consequences for harassing library workers.

PRH’s Dan Novack agrees that everyone has a role in a nationwide legal strategy. “There’s always somebody who unlocks doors in each place,” Novack says. “Because this is a 50-state phenomenon, we can’t approach it as one aggregate thing.”