Virginia Court Rules Two LGBTQ+ YA Novels Are Not Obscene
An anticipated legal trial determining if two YA novels are obscene was resolved Aug. 30 with both titles — "Gender Queer" by Maia Kobabe and 'A Court of Mist and Fury" by Sarah J. Maas — not meeting the legal definition of obscenity. The judge in the case also noted the lawsuit raised questions of due process, reports the website Book Riot.
The two lawsuits, Book Riot continues, were filed by attorney and Virginia State Delegate Tim Anderson, on the behalf of client Tommy Altman. They sought to have both books removed from schools and libraries. The first lawsuit included a restraining order against Barnes & Noble and Virginia Beach Schools, and the second lawsuit focused on Oni Press, publisher of "Gender Queer," as well as its author Maia Kobabe.
"Today's decision means Anderson's claims that books like Kobabe and Maas' are not illegal per the state's obscenity laws," writes Book Riot.
Book Riot points out that obscenity laws demand examining a work in relation to its whole. "'Gender Queer' is a book published for adult audiences, and the small excerpts (which are seven whole pages total) making the rounds on social media featuring sex are age-appropriate and not representative of the whole of the book." In her brief, Kobabe asked "whether those seven pages are the dominant theme of the book, taken as a whole; whether the remaining 233 pages are mere empty filler."
In the decision, the website Bleeding Cool writes, "the courts have stated that the Virginia Code does not give the court statutory authority to make a determination that the books are obscene as to minors, that the case includes defective pleading and that the obscure Virginian code the case was brought under, appears to be unconstitutional. There was an almost identical statement issued regarding the novel, 'The Court of Mist and Fury,' which was also under a similar lawsuit."
Anderson claimed that the books are obscene according to the following Virginia statute: "Whenever he has reasonable cause to believe that any person is engaged in the sale or commercial distribution of any obscene book, any citizen or the attorney for the Commonwealth of any county or city, or city attorney, in which the sale or commercial distribution of such book occurs may institute a proceeding in the circuit court in said city or county for adjudication of the obscenity of the book."
The outcome of the lawsuit will be "a big step forward for First Amendment advocates and for readers who want access to books," writes Book Riot. "It will help in setting a standard against the argument that books like these—as well as the hundreds of others being challenged and banned across the 50 states—do not meet the legal definition of obscenity."