AG Murrill: Move the Vulgar Kids Books

On February 6, 2026, Attorney General Liz Murrill issued Opinion 25-0069, resolving a question that has lingered in Louisiana’s library debate for years: what does “access” actually mean under La. R.S. 25:225?

Anyone who remembers what happened to a parent in Livingston Parish knows that checkout restrictions are not the proper benchmark for evaluating a children’s section. That is especially true when policies permit sexually explicit material to remain interspersed among ordinary children’s books.

The disagreement over that practice has shaped this debate for years and ultimately led to the passage of Act 436 during the 2023 regular session. Authored by Senator Heather Cloud and Representative Julie Emerson, this consequential legislation explicitly identifies materials unsuitable for the children’s section.

Two Visions of Protection

There are two distinct visions, each with the same stated goal of protecting children. The first we’ll cover is best summed up by a recent Amanda Jones quote from the Advocate:

“Our job as a librarian is so grounded in protecting our children, protecting our students, our patrons and their rights… and so it’s so ironic to me that we’re being attacked for it.”

That sentiment reflects one side of the divide. From that perspective, even age-appropriate shelving is framed as censorship. Efforts to relocate or limit physical exposure to sexually explicit material are described as attacks on intellectual freedom. This narrative frames librarians as defenders of “Freadom” — their shorthand for the “freedom to read” — against perceived suppression.

But the debate has never been about whether adults may read controversial works. It has always been about whether minors may freely encounter sexually explicit content without express parental consent.

And that brings us to the other vision of protecting children—one grounded in statutory law. Louisiana law does not ban books. Adults retain the right to read whatever they wish. La. R.S. 25:225, enacted in 2023, requires something more precise and more modest: that libraries adopt policies limiting minors’ access to sexually explicit material. It recognizes the fundamental right of parents — not public institutions — to guide their children’s upbringing.

The Attorney General’s opinion aims to consolidate this double-vision into a single, cohesive standard.

The Ambiguity Narrative is Over

The opinion was issued in response to a request from State Representative Beryl Amedee (R 10/10). The question presented was simple: What is the proper legal interpretation of the term “access” as used in La. R.S. 25:225?

The answer was equally direct. “Access,” the Attorney General concluded, includes a minor’s ability to physically encounter or use such materials.

Not merely checking them out, not taking them home, but even a minor’s ability to have a chance encounter with the material on the shelf constitutes “access.” For communities that have spent the last several years watching this debate unfold from Lafayette to Washington Parish and beyond, that clarification matters.

What the Opinion Actually Does

AG Liz Murrill’s opinion affirms three critical points:

1. “Access” is not limited to checkout privileges.
2. A minor’s ability to physically encounter material counts as access.
3. Libraries retain discretion to impose physical restrictions consistent with the statute’s purpose.

That third point deserves emphasis. Rather than feel-good talking points, the law is actually contemplating active safeguards. It acknowledges parental authority as fundamental and requires that library policies must reflect that core right. No longer will a passive assumption that “silence means consent” be considered an ample policy.

Allowing minors unrestricted access to explicit materials while claiming card-based checkout blocks are sufficient protection of children’s innocence was never supposed to be the standard. That kind of hide-and-seek policy game has now been officially deemed insufficient by the Attorney General.

The Long Arc of This Debate

For years, we have covered these disputes as they unfolded across Louisiana. Activists have even called Citizens for a New Louisiana the point of the spear on Louisiana’s ongoing library debate. Our work has documented policies that relied entirely on checkout restrictions while leaving explicit materials shelved within arm’s reach of children. We have examined reconsideration procedures, open-meeting votes, and the tensions between boards of control and activist pressure. We have heard activists repeatedly claim that the law states something parents have never agreed to.

The most important development today is that the book on this legal question is now closed. When the Legislature passed La. R.S. 25:225, it explicitly recognized the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children. The statute was not ambiguous in its purpose, but in many libraries, its full application was contested, delayed, and ignored.

Opinion 25-0069 narrows that gap. The word “access” now carries the plain meaning most parents assumed it always did.

A Moment of Clarity

This opinion does not end the debate, nor should it. Public policy questions rarely disappear because one longstanding legal question is finally resolved. But clarity matters to parents who were told that their concerns were exaggerated; it matters to library boards trying to navigate compliance in good faith; and it matters to communities weary of being repeatedly told that protecting minors from sexually explicit material is somehow equivalent to banning books.

The law stands where it has always stood: adults are free; minors are protected; parents are empowered. Louisiana has now stated explicitly that a physical encounter constitutes access. Some will frame this as an attack or insist that restraint equals repression. But statutes are not shaped by slogans. They are interpreted by law. Now that the law is clarified, responsible institutions are expected to adjust accordingly.

###