SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
pen america
'An Embrace of Anti-Intellectualism': Public School Bans on Nonfiction Books Doubled as Trump Returned to Power
One expert warned that removing works on activism and social movements erodes the ability of marginalized communities "to take action amid rising authoritarian tactics by our government and attacks on free speech."
May 07, 2026
As President Donald Trump returned to the White House in the middle of the 2024-25 academic year and swiftly pursued increasingly authoritarian policies, there was "an embrace of anti-intellectualism" within the book-banning movement targeting US public schools and classrooms.
That embrace is detailed in "Facts & Fiction: Stories Stripped Away By Book Bans," an annual report released Thursday by PEN America, a nonprofit that promotes the protection of free expression through the advancement of human rights and literature.
The group found that from July 2024 to last June, 3,743 unique titles were removed from school libraries and classrooms nationwide—and 1,102 of them were "educational or informational books for young people—textbooks or reference texts on a wide range of subjects, history books, biographies, and autobiographies."
Although the majority of banned titles were still fiction, such as Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury and The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, the share of "fiction titles dropped from 85% to 69% of all banned titles, while nonfiction rose from 14% to a startling 29% of all banned titles," according to the analysis.
"This marked impact on books anchored in scientific and historic facts, real events, and real people represents something new and distinctive about the trajectory of book bans in public schools," the report states. "As nonfiction titles are not always the targets of efforts to remove books, that books on ancient Egypt, the digestive system, and self-help for teens, to name a few examples, are impacted by censorship signals an alarming spread of book bans that ignore the educational value of texts and books."
Targeted "nonfiction titles are wide-ranging," the report notes, "from memoirs such as Night by Elie Wiesel to biographies such as RuPaul by Maria Isabel Sánchez Vegara, alongside historical and educational or informational books such as Aztec, Inca & Maya by Elizabeth Baquedano and Challenges for LGBTQ Teens by Martha Lundin."
Flagging this "embrace of anti-intellectualism" in a statement about the new report, Kasey Meehan, director of PEN America's Freedom to Read program, said that "it is another example of how censorship sweeps broadly, leading to removals of all kinds of books, in its efforts to sow fear and distrust in our public education system."
Like the previous academic year, "realistic/contemporary and dystopia/sci-fi/fantasy remain the dominant genres banned," the publication highlights. "But of note, educational/informational titles grew from 5% of all titles in 2023-24 to 13% of total titles banned in 2024-25, or nearly 500 unique titles."
Among the nonfiction titles banned, "52% contained themes of activism and social movements, the most commonly banned topic within nonfiction titles," the report says. "Whether #WomensMarch: Insisting on Equality by Rebecca Felix or IntersectionAllies: We Make Room for All by Chelsea Johnson, LaToya Council, and Carolyn Choi, and illustrated by Ashley Seil Smith, this literature is crucial in the education of young people. These books can encourage readers to challenge the status quo and resist injustice."
Freedom to Read program assistant and report co-author Yuliana Tamayo Latorre said that removing books on these topics "silences the voices of marginalized communities and erode[s] their ability to take action amid rising authoritarian tactics by our government and attacks on free speech."
The most common theme across all banned books was nonsexual violence. This was a theme in 57% of the targeted titles, and they addressed topics including "war, gun violence, natural disasters, domestic violence, human trafficking, slavery and genocide, physical fighting, and more."
Other key themes included death and grief (48%), empowerment and self-esteem (39%), LGBTQ+ topics and metaphors (36%), consensual sexual experiences (34%), mental health disorders (29%), verbal or emotional abuse (28%), and substance use and/or abuse (27%).
There was an increase in banned titles with themes of empowerment and self-esteem, up from 31% in 2023-24.
"Fictional titles with themes of empowerment include Flor Fights Back: A Stonewall Riots Survival Story by Joy Michael Ellison and illustrated by Francesca Ficorilli, and The Moon Within by Aida Salazar," the report says. "To remove these books from classroom and library shelves means revoking access to books that students may rely on for personal and emotional development."
There is an entire section of the report about "erasing people" that examines trends in the identities of characters in banned books. Of all the targeted titles, 44% featured people of color, 39% had LGBTQ+ characters, 19% included transgender or genderqueer individuals, and 10% involved those who are neurodivergent or disabled.
Trump and other leading Republicans have embraced and advanced campaigns against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). PEN America acknowledged that such efforts "have contributed to restrictions and removals on books with people of color and mirror efforts to suppress curriculum on Indigenous history, Black history, Asian American and Pacific Islander stories, and Latine and Hispanic contributions."
Another section of the report addresses a major "discrepancy between the titles impacted by book bans and the justifications made to ban books. Book banners have long cited 'pornography' and 'sexually explicit' material in literature to justify book challenges. Claims that these books contain 'explicit' or 'obscene' content grossly misrepresent the materials."
That section points out that 19% of last year's banned titles contained sexual violence—and "according to RAINN, 1 in 9 girls and 1 in 20 boys under 18 experience sexual abuse or assault. With so many of these titles banned since 2021, it is possible that some young people who have experienced sexual violence no longer have access to books that could help them."
"Books containing experiences of sexual violence include The Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead, winner of the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, set in a 1960s Southern juvenile reform school, and Laurie Halse Anderson's memoir Shout, a call to action for sexual abuse and trauma survivors in the wake of the #MeToo movement," according to PEN America.
The group's report came just a few weeks after a similar annual publication from the American Library Association, which details challenges to at least 4,235 unique titles in 2025, resulting in bans on at least 5,668 books and restrictions on another 920 works.
"In 2025, book bans were not sparked by concerned parents, and they were not the result of local grassroots efforts," noted Sarah Lamdan, executive director of the association's Office for Intellectual Freedom. “They were part of a well-funded, politically driven campaign to suppress the stories and lived experiences of LGBTQIA+ and BIPOC individuals and communities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Sound the Alarm': Lawmakers Vote to Subpoena Journalist Who Named Delta Force Commander
One expert asserted that the House vote to subpoena Seth Harp "is clearly designed to chill and intimidate" journalists from reporting on government policies and practices.
Jan 09, 2026
Free press defenders voiced alarm and outrage following Wednesday's vote by a congressional committee to subpoena a journalist wrongly accused of "leaking classified intel" and "doxing" a US special forces commander involved in President Donald Trump's invasion of Venezuela and abduction of the South American nation's president and his wife.
Seth Harp is an investigative journalist, New York Times bestselling author, and Iraq war veteran whose work focuses on links between the US military and organized crime. On January 4—the day after the US bombed and invaded Venezuela and kidnapped Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores—Harp posted on X the name and photo of a commander in Delta Force, which played a key role in the attack.
Experts noted that Harp did not break any laws, with Freedom of the Press Foundation chief of advocacy Seth Stern pointing out that "reporters have a constitutional right to publish even classified leaks as long as they don’t commit crimes to obtain them."
“Harp merely published information that was publicly available about someone at the center of the world’s biggest news story," he added.
However, the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday approved in a voice vote a motion introduced the previous day by Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) to subpoena Harper. Democrats on the committee backed the measure after Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) added an amendment to also subpoena co-executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate, according to the Washington Post.
Responding to the committee vote, Harp told the Post:
The idea of a reporter "leaking classified intel" is a contradiction in terms. The First Amendment and ironclad Supreme Court precedent permit journalists to publish classified documents. We don’t work for the government and it’s our job to expose secrets, not protect them for the convenience of high-ranking officials. It’s not “doxing" to point out which high-ranking military officials are involved in breaking news events. That’s information that the public has a right to know.
Harp also took to social media to underscore that he's not the only journalist being targeted with dubious "doxing" claims.
The House lawmakers' vote drew widespread condemnation from press freedom advocates.
“Luna’s subpoena of investigative reporter Seth Harp is clearly designed to chill and intimidate a journalist doing some of the most significant investigative reporting on US special forces," Defending Rights & Dissent policy director Chip Gibbons said in a statement.
"Harp did not share classified information about the US regime change operation in Venezuela. And even if he had, his actions would firmly be protected by the First Amendment," Gibbons added. "This is a dangerous assault on the press freedom, as well as the US people’s right to know. It is shameful it passed the committee.”
PEN America Journalism and Disinformation program director Tim Richardson said Thursday that “any attempt to haul an investigative reporter before Congress for doing their job reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of a free press."
"Seth Harp is an independent journalist, not a government official, and therefore cannot be accused of ‘leaking’ classified information in the way those entrusted with such material can," Richardson added. "The information at issue was publicly available, not secret or unlawfully obtained."
In a bid to protect reporters and their sources, House lawmakers in 2024 unanimously passed the PRESS Act, legislation prohibiting the federal government from compelling journalists and telecommunications companies to disclose certain information, with exceptions for imminent violence or terrorism. However, under pressure from Trump, the Senate declined to vote on the proposal.
"The bill died after Trump ordered the Senate to kill it on Truth Social," said Stern. "Apparently, so did the principles of Reps. Luna, Garcia, and their colleagues.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Stephen King 'Most Banned Author' in US Schools, Says PEN America
"Self-righteous book banners don't always get to have their way," the iconic author wrote, urging people to read banned titles. "This is still America, dammit."
Oct 01, 2025
Stephen King was the most banned author in US public schools during the 2024-25 academic year amid "rampant" censorship led by purportedly free speech-loving Republicans, a report published on Wednesday revealed.
According to PEN America, there were 6,870 instances of book bans across 23 states and 87 public school districts during the last scholastic year. Although that's a significant drop from the more than 10,000 proscriptions recorded by the group during the previous academic term, it is still more than double the number from 2022-23, and brings the total number of prohibitions to nearly 23,000 since 2021.
For the third straight year, Florida topped the dubious list, with 2,304 instances of book bans, followed by Texas, where 1,781 bans occurred, and Tennessee, with 1,622. Right-wing groups and Republican state lawmakers—who often claim to champion free speech—have worked together to pass censorship laws driving bans on books they don't like, especially titles related to racial justice and LGBTQ+ rights.
“No bookshelf will be left untouched if local and state book bans continue wreaking havoc on the freedom to read in public schools,” PEN America Freedom to Read program senior manager Sabrina Baêta said in a statement.
“With the Trump White House now also driving a clear culture of censorship, our core principles of free speech, open inquiry, and access to diverse and inclusive books are severely at risk," Baêta added. "Book bans stand in the way of a more just, informed, and equitable world. They chill the freedom to read and restrict the rights of students to access information and read freely.”
Bestselling author @stephenking.bsky.social was the most banned author during the school year. 87 titles of King’s were banned, totaling 206 times. Next most banned was @ellenhopkins.bsky.social author of young adult fiction including Crank and Burned, who had 18 titles banned totaling 167 times.
[image or embed]
— PEN America (@penamerica.bsky.social) October 1, 2025 at 7:23 AM
King, the bestselling icon of horror novels and short stories, was the most banned author during the 2024-25 school year, with 87 titles banned a total of 206 times. King has been an outspoken critic of both book bans and President Donald Trump, whose presidency he has called a "horror story."
The most blacklisted title of any author was Anthony Burgess’ dystopian 1962 novel A Clockwork Orange, which PEN America said was banned 23 times.
Responding to becoming the nation's most proscribed writer, King said on social media, "I am now the most banned author in the United States—87 books."
"May I suggest you pick up one of them and see what all the pissing and moaning is about?" he added. "Self-righteous book banners don't always get to have their way. This is still America, dammit."
Keep ReadingShow Less
ACLU Asks Court to Free Journalist at Risk of Swift Deportation to El Salvador
"If Mr. Guevara is deported it will be a devastating outcome for a journalist whose initial detention was a gross violation of his rights," said ACLU of Georgia legal director Cory Isaacson.
Sep 19, 2025
The ACLU is asking a federal district court in Georgia to order the immediate release of Mario Guevara, a journalist arrested while covering a June "No Kings" protest, after the Board of Immigration Appeals on Friday ordered his return to El Salvador.
The Emmy-winning Spanish-language journalist has reported on immigrant issues in the Atlanta area for two decades. When he was arrested on the job this year, he had a work permit and a path to a green card through his US citizen son. The charges from June have been dropped, but he remains at the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) center in Folkston.
ICE refused to comply with a July 1 decision that Guevara could be released on bond. The Board of Immigration Appeals has now dismissed his bond appeal "as 'moot' because it has also granted the government's motion to reopen his removal proceedings," according to the ACLU—which secured an emergency federal district court hearing on Friday.
"Mr. Guevara should not even be in immigration detention, but the government has kept him there for months because of his crucial reporting on law enforcement activity," said Scarlet Kim, senior staff attorney with the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. "The fact that he may now be put on a plane to El Salvador, a country he fled out of fear, at any moment, despite a clear path to becoming a permanent resident, is despicable. The court must ensure he is not deported and should order his release from detention immediately."
"The fact that he may now be put on a plane to El Salvador, a country he fled out of fear, at any moment, despite a clear path to becoming a permanent resident, is despicable."
In a letter published Friday by The Bitter Southerner, Guevara detailed his experience since his arrest and wrote: "I don't know why ICE wants to continue treating me like a criminal. It pains me to know that I have been denied every privilege and the right to be free when I have never committed any crime."
"This whole situation has me devastated, and not only morally, but also economically, because I am the breadwinner for the home," he explained. "Since my arrest, I have lost tens of thousands of dollars, and my company, the news channel MGNews, is on the verge of bankruptcy."
"But I have to remain strong and confident that the United States still has some caring and decency left and that in the end justice will prevail," he added. "Hopefully, soon all my tears and my family's tears will be wiped away, and we can have fun and smile, triumphant, as we did before, together and in absolute freedom."
Guevara's legal team and press freedom groups have emphasized that his case is bigger than a single reporter. As ACLU of Georgia legal director Cory Isaacson put it on Friday, "If Mr. Guevara is deported it will be a devastating outcome for a journalist whose initial detention was a gross violation of his rights."
"The immediate release of Mr. Guevara is the only way to correct this injustice that has immeasurably harmed his well-being and the well-being of his family, the community, and the people of Georgia," Isaacson added. "In a democracy, journalists should not be arrested for exercising their constitutional rights to report the news."
Mario Guevara is here legally and is not facing any criminal charges.He is being thrown out of the country for nothing but reporting news.
[image or embed]
— Freedom of the Press Foundation (@freedom.press) September 19, 2025 at 3:00 PM
Other free press advocates also responded with alarm to the Board of Immigration Appeals' Friday decision.
"We are outraged that journalist Mario Guevara was initially detained for almost 100 days because the government believes that livestreaming law enforcement poses a danger to their operations," Committee to Protect Journalists US, Canada, and Caribbean program coordinator Katherine Jacobsen said in a Friday statement.
"This latest move allows the government to circumvent addressing the reason why Guevara was detained, in retaliation for his journalism," Jacobsen continued. "Instead, authorities are using the very real threat of deportation to remove a reporter from the country simply for doing his job and covering the news."
Tim Richardson, journalism and disinformation program director at PEN America, similarly said that "if carried out, this ruling would mark a dangerous moment for press freedom, with the United States—long considered a beacon for free speech—moving to deport a journalist in direct retaliation for his reporting."
"This mirrors the tactics of authoritarian governments the US has long condemned and sends a chilling message to reporters everywhere, especially those covering vulnerable communities or government abuses of power," he added. "We urge the court to reconsider and to allow Mario Guevara to remain in the country and continue his reporting free from fear of deportation or retaliation."
US President Donald Trump campaigned on the promise of mass deportations, and since returning to power in January, his administration has sought to deliver on that. On Friday, Free Press senior counsel Nora Benavidez warned, "Deportation without due process—that would be the new normal set by Mario Guevara's removal from the United States."
"Horrific and lawless, this is the environment the Trump administration created to promote a singular approved narrative, remove critical news coverage for communities, and chill journalists' freedom should they dare hold power to account," she said. "Mr. Guevara's case is happening live, with breaking updates occurring under a sealed case shrouded in secrecy, upon which his removal and ability to report depend."
Ahead of the developments on Friday, Benavidez had tied Guevara's case to the government's effort to deport Mahmoud Khalil over his protests against Israel's US-backed genocide in Gaza, and Disney yanking late-night host Jimmy Kimmel off the air after the Trump administration objected to his comments about the fatal shooting of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
"Mahmoud Khalil was just ordered to be deported for his free speech," she said Thursday. "Mario Guevara is in detention for filming police. Jimmy Kimmel taken off air for his speech. TikTok [is] being bought by Trump cronies. All of it moves towards one singular narrative Trump approves. We must resist."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Journalist Who Decried Trump's 'Deportation of Dissent' Says He Was Deported for Dissent
"Alistair Kitchen's deportation is a clear case of retaliation in connection with his reporting, and such action sends a chilling message to journalists," said one press freedom defender.
Jun 18, 2025
A leading press freedom advocate on Tuesday condemned the United States' "disturbing pattern" of screening and expelling international visitors for their political viewpoints following the detention and removal of an Australian journalist who criticized the Trump administration's targeting of Palestine defenders on college campuses.
Alistair Kitchen said he was detained for 12 hours and interrogated by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents in Los Angeles International Airport while en route from Melbourne, Australia to New York last week.
"If you are deleting social media 48 hours before your flight to the U.S., it is already too late."
"I was denied entry, detained, and deported from the USA over the last 48 hours because of my reporting on the Columbia [University] student protests," Kitchen wrote Friday on the social media site Bluesky. "I arrived back in Melbourne hours ago and had my phone handed back to me upon landing."
"I had it easy," he added, "one woman had been in that detention room four days when I arrived; she's still there."
Kitchen said that CBP agents "were waiting for me when I got off the plane," and although he "had cleaned up my online presence expecting ad hoc digital sweeps," he "was not prepared for their sophistication."
"If you are deleting social media 48 hours before your flight to the U.S., it is already too late," he stressed.
Kitchen wrote that the agents "just came out and said it: 'We both know why you've been detained…it's because of what you wrote about the protests at Columbia,'" he recounted.
"Writers, artists, and scholars must be free to express their views openly without compromising their free movement across borders," said PEN America's @jonfreadom.bsky.social following detainment and deportation of Australian writer Alistair Kitchen for his personal writings pen.org/press-releas...
[image or embed]
— PEN America (@penamerica.bsky.social) June 17, 2025 at 5:32 PM
Responding to Kitchen's ordeal, Jonathan Friedman, managing director of the U.S. Free Expression Programs at PEN America, said in a statement Tuesday that "it is gravely concerning to read an account of someone being detained and turned away at the border due to their writings on student protests, Palestine, and the Trump administration."
"Writers, artists, and scholars must be free to express their views openly without compromising their free movement across borders," Friedman added. "Kitchen's account fits a disturbing pattern, in which border agents appear to be screening visitors to the U.S. for their viewpoints. That is anti-democratic, and it must be halted."
The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)—which earlier this year issued its first-ever travel advisory for journalists entering the United States, including warnings about searches of electronic devices—called Kitchen's detention and expulsion "alarming."
"Alistair Kitchen's deportation is a clear case of retaliation in connection with his reporting, and such action sends a chilling message to journalists that they must support the administration's narratives or face forms of retribution," CPJ U.S., Canada, and Caribbean Program coordinator Katherine Jacobsen said Monday.
"Foreign media operating on U.S. soil are covered by First Amendment protections, and it is incumbent upon U.S. officials—from [CBP] to the White House—to allow journalists to do their jobs and travel freely without fear of reprisal," Jacobsen added.
Kitchen suspects CBP agents used technology contracted from Palantir, which has been targeted by the No Tech for Apartheid movement over its involvement in Project Nimbus, a cloud computing collaboration between Israel's military and tech titans Amazon and Google criticized for enabling Israeli human rights crimes.
In March, Kitchen published a piece on his Kitchen Counter blog, titled "On the Deportation of Dissent." The post highlighted the case of Mahmoud Khalil, a permanent U.S. resident and former Columbia University student and Palestine solidarity activist arrested on March 8 by plainclothes Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officers in front of his pregnant wife in New York before being transferred to New Jersey and then to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement lockup in Louisiana, where he missed the birth of his son.
Khalil, who the Trump administration admits has committed no crime, is being held as a political prisoner under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, which empowers the secretary of state to expel noncitizens whose presence in the United States is deemed detrimental to U.S. foreign policy interests. Numerous foreign nationals, including green-card holders, have been targeted under the law for criticizing Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza and U.S. complicity.
Kitchen wrote:
The goal here is the deportation of dissent. In an executive order 10 days ago, the Trump administration promised to "go on offense to enforce law and order" by "cancel[ing] the student visas of all Hamas sympathizers on college campuses." This is a mode of speech suppression that seeks to physically remove the undesirable elements it can, and, through fear, ensure silence in everyone else.
To my mind the arrest of a student on utterly specious grounds by a neo-fascist state, clearly designed to breed a climate of fear among students, calls for the resignation of a university president. That role is untenable so long as it does not involve the ferocious protection of student speech. The same goes for faculty, who last year demonstrated a mixed commitment to the defense of students. The situation requires their concerted action.
"The CBP explicitly said to me, the reason you have been detained is because of your writing on the Columbia student protests," Kitchen told Guardian Australia on Sunday.
However, a DHS spokesperson denied Kitchen's assertion, telling the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that he was denied entry to the United States "because he gave false information" regarding alleged drug use on his Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) application.
"Lawful travelers have nothing to fear from [vetting] measures, which are designed to protect our nation's security," the spokesperson added. "However, those intending to enter the U.S. with fraudulent purposes or malicious intent are offered the following advice: Don't even try."
Kitchen told Guardian Australia that he had previously indicated on an ESTA application that he had not done drugs, but admitted under interrogation that he legally purchased marijuana in New York state and partook while abroad.
"There's certainly not proof of me doing drugs on my phone," he said. "But this is a method of interrogation that uses entrapment."
Kitchen added that "in retrospect, I should have... accepted immediate deportation," but that he was "too compliant, too trustful, too hopeful" at the start of his detention.
Free press advocates said Kitchen's detention and removal was yet another sign that "we are becoming a police state," as well as a reason "to avoid the United States as a holiday destination like the bubonic plague," and, as the hacktivist collective Anonymous called it, "a harsh lesson in digital footprints."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Number of Jailed Writers Increases Worldwide for Sixth Consecutive Year
"We are seeing that free expression, and therefore writers, are increasingly in the crosshairs of repression in a much wider range of countries," said PEN America.
Apr 24, 2025
A report released Thursday by the free expression group PEN America detailed how authoritarian regimes around the world, recognizing "the role that writers play in promoting critical inquiry and cultivating visions of a better, more just world," jailed more journalists and writers last year than ever before.
The number of imprisoned writers has ticked up each year since the group began its yearly Freedom to Write Index six years ago. In 2024, the index recorded 375 writers in prison across 40 countries—up from 339 writers who were detained in 33 countries the previous year.
The group observed startling trends in governments' crackdown on freedom of expression last year. The number of women imprisoned for their writing rose, with women making up 16% of those incarcerated last year, compared with 15% in 2023 and 14% in 2022.
Writers classified as "online commentators" accounted for 203 imprisoned authors last year, while 127 journalists were jailed for their work. Other professions represented in the index include literary writers, poets, songwriters, and creative artists.
"The high numbers of writers in the online commentator and journalist categories suggest that a significant proportion of the cases included jailing or other threats because of their writing commentary on politics or official policies, economic or social themes, or advocacy for a range of human rights," reads the report.
China and Iran are the biggest jailers of writers, with the two countries accounting for 43% of imprisoned writers worldwide.
Other top offenders include Saudi Arabia with 23 writers, Israel with 21, Russia with 18, and Belarus with 15.
"Authoritarian regimes are desperate to control the narrative of history and repress the truth about what they are doing. That is why writers are so important, and why we see these regimes attempting to silence them," said Karin Deutsch Karlekar, PEN America's director of writers at risk. "Jailing one writer for their words is a miscarriage of justice, but the systematic suppression of writers around the world represents an erosion of free expression—which is often the precursor to the destruction of other fundamental human rights."
The index includes all cases in which writers are detained for at least 48 hours in its accounting of jailed writers. The report notes that as in previous years, PEN America observed an increase in the number of writers held without charge or in pre-trial detention, with 80 such cases last year—up from 76 in 2023.
The majority of writers held in administrative and pre-trial detention—"tools of repression," the report says—were detained by officials in China, Egypt, and Israel.
The index highlighted a number of cases of jailed writers, including:
- Ilham Tohti, a Uyghur economist and blogger who "has been detained incommunicado since 2017" after being sentenced to life in prison by a court in Umruqi, China in 2014;
- Nobel Peace Prize laureate and women's rights campaigner Narges Mohammadi, who was among several women attacked by Iranian military forces and prison guards at Iran's Evin prison in August 2024; and
- Mahmoud Fatafta, a Palestinian columnist who was arrested in May 2024 by Israeli security forces in the West Bank while traveling with his 10-year-old son, with authorities citing his Facebook post in which he quoted Egyptian scholar Abdul Wahab al-Mesiri: "The more brutal the colonizer becomes, the nearer his end is."
Fatafta's arrest came amid Israel's U.S.-backed assault on Gaza and the West Bank, which has provoked outcry by international human rights groups, including in Israel and the United States.
The U.S. was not named as a country of concern in the index, but PEN America pointed to "recent developments in the United States," with the Trump administration revoking visas of foreign students who have protested the government's support for Israel and detaining several student organizers, as evidence of "the precarious nature of freedom of expression."
"The suppression of free expression has taken on an especially troubling dimension on college campuses where Palestinian and pro-Palestinian voices are being silenced, including via attempts to deport student activists, limiting discourse on issues of the war in Gaza and human rights," reads the report.
PEN America noted that Columbia student organizers Mahmoud Khalil and Mohsen Mahdawi and Tufts student Rumeysa Ozturk were apparently detained "purely on the grounds of speech protected by the U.S. Constitution," with Ozturk targeted specifically because she co-authored an opinion piece for a student newspaper.
Their detention, said the group, "not only undermines academic freedom but also stifles the critical exchange of ideas."
"As geopolitics continue to shift and authoritarian tendencies spread to countries that were once considered safely anchored in openness," said PEN America, "we are seeing that free expression, and therefore writers, are increasingly in the crosshairs of repression in a much wider range of countries."
Karlekar said that writers like those who have been detained in the last year "represent a threat to disinformation and encourage people to think critically about what is going on around them."
"War, conflict, and attacks against the free exchange of information and ideas go hand in hand with lies and propaganda," said Karlekar. "With the index, we want to alert the world to the jailing and mistreatment of these 375 writers. Each and every one of them should be released, and we insist that the world's jailers of writers end this repression and abuse."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Truly Dystopian': Trump Administration Threatens Public Schools With Funding Cuts
A new Trump administration directive aims to "reduce our colleges and universities to the status of echo chambers, similar to those controlled by authoritarian states," warned PEN America.
Feb 16, 2025
Lawmakers and free expression groups voiced alarm Saturday after the Trump administration threatened to investigate and strip federal funding from public schools, including colleges and universities that don't comply with its broad interpretation of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down affirmative action programs in admissions.
In a letter to state education officials on Friday, Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary for civil rights at the U.S. Department of Education, wrote that the agency "intends to take appropriate measures to assess compliance with the applicable statutes and regulations based on the understanding embodied in this letter beginning no later than 14 days from today's date, including antidiscrimination requirements that are a condition of receiving federal funding."
"Institutions that fail to comply with federal civil rights law may, consistent with applicable law, face potential loss of federal funding," the letter states.
The letter takes aim at "DEI programs"—a right-wing boogeyman that the Trump administration has used as a pretext to rip apart federal agencies—and declares that the Education Department "will no longer tolerate the overt and covert racial discrimination that has become widespread in this nation's educational institutions," even as halts thousands of civil rights investigations.
PEN America warned that Trainor's sweeping directive "seeks to declare it a civil rights violation for educational institutions to engage in any diversity-related programming or to promote any diversity-related ideas—potentially including everything from a panel on the Civil Rights Movement to a Lunar New Year celebration."
"This declaration has no basis in law and is an affront to the freedom of speech and ideas in educational settings. It represents yet another twisting of civil rights law in an effort to demand ideological conformity by schools and universities," the group said in a statement Saturday. "To enact government interference in the intellectual life of such institutions is to end the United States' centuries-long history of intellectual freedom in educational settings, and to reduce our colleges and universities to the status of echo chambers, similar to those controlled by authoritarian states."
Brian Rosenberg, visiting professor of education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, told Inside Higher Ed that the letter was "truly dystopian."
"It goes well beyond the Supreme Court ruling on admissions and declares illegal a wide range of common practices," Rosenberg said. "In my career I've never seen language of this kind from any government agency in the United States."
"Republicans tell you they want to empower local communities and that states, schools, and parents know best, and again and again use top-down threats to achieve their culture war agenda."
The letter comes amid the Trump administration's broader assault on public education, including a push to abolish the Education Department altogether. That assault is expected to intensify if billionaire Linda McMahon, a proponent of school privatization, is confirmed as education secretary.
The Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency—which is currently rampaging through the Education Department and terminating contracts—posted Trainor's letter to X, the social media platform owned by Musk.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a senior member of the Senate Education Committee, said Saturday that "this threat to rip away the federal funding our public K-12 schools and colleges receive flies in the face of the law."
"I hope no parent, student, or teacher is intimidated by these threats—this former preschool teacher certainly is not," said Murray. " While it's anyone's guess what falls under the Trump administration's definition of 'DEI,' there is simply no authority or basis for Trump to impose such a mandate. In fact, federal laws prohibit ANY president from telling schools and colleges what to teach, including the Every Student Succeeds Act, that I negotiated with Republicans."
"Rather than trying to make college more affordable or helping to improve our kids' outcomes, Trump is letting far-right extremists inject politics into the classroom at every turn," Murray added. "Republicans tell you they want to empower local communities and that states, schools, and parents know best, and again and again use top-down threats to achieve their culture war agenda."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Targets AP, Media Urged to Resist Moves Like 'Gulf of America' Renaming
"It's at times like these that journalists need to put down their pens and advocate for accountable leadership," asserted one campaigner.
Feb 14, 2025
First Amendment defenders are calling on media organizations and journalists to stand up to bullying and intimidation by U.S. President Donald Trump, whose administration on Friday confirmed the indefinite exclusion of one of the world's largest news agencies from White House press briefings and Air Force One flights over its refusal to adopt the Republican leader's new name for the Gulf of Mexico.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich said that because The Associated Press "continues to ignore the lawful geographic name change" of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, it will be indefinitely banned from White House news conferences and the president's official airplane.
"The level of pettiness displayed by the White House is so incredible that it almost hides the gravity of the situation."
The New York-based AP, which provides news content to roughly 15,000 media outlets in over 100 countries, has explained that, because the gulf is an international body of water, it will continue to call it the Gulf of Mexico because Mexico—whose president on Thursday threatened to sue Google for adopting Trump's name change—and other countries do not recognize the new name.
In contrast, the AP said it will call Denali, the highest peak in North America, Mt. McKinley following a name change by Trump because the Alaska mountain is located entirely inside the United States.
Budowich said the AP's decision on the Gulf of Mexico exposes the agency's "commitment to misinformation."
"While their right to irresponsible and dishonest reporting is protected by the First Amendment, it does not ensure their privilege of unfettered access to limited spaces," he argued.
But critics said the Trump administration's behavior is about a lot more than just a spat over a name change.
"Of course, this is just more petty behavior by a president seeking to punish any news organization that doesn't follow his dictates, regardless of how ridiculous they may be," Timothy Karr, the senior director of strategy and communications at Free Press, told Common Dreams on Friday.
"It's at times like these that journalists need to put down their pens and advocate for accountable leadership," Karr stressed. "They need to advocate for themselves, their colleagues, and for journalism writ large."
"The good news is that more than a dozen of the mass market news outlets have refused to adopt Trump's name change for the Gulf of Mexico," he added. "That's a start. They now need to speak out against his First Amendment threats, despite the consequences. There is much more at stake now than just having access to the White House."
"By defying Trump, the AP has created a rallying point for other organizations and individuals to find their spines and defy him as well."
Writing for Public Notice Friday, Noah Berlatsky commended the AP for "not changing their style to suit the whims of a would-be tin-pot dictator."
"And by defying Trump, the AP has created a rallying point for other organizations and individuals to find their spines and defy him as well," Berlatsky added.
Those include the heads of the White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA) and Reporters Without Borders (RSF), as well as groups like the Committee to Protect Journalists, National Press Club, PEN America, and Society of Professional Journalists.
"The White House cannot dictate how news organizations report the news, nor should it penalize working journalists because it is unhappy with their editors' decisions," WHCA president Eugene Daniels said earlier this week.
RSF USA executive director Clayton Weimers said in a statement that "the level of pettiness displayed by the White House is so incredible that it almost hides the gravity of the situation."
"A sitting president is punishing a major news outlet for its constitutionally protected choice of words," Weimers added. "Donald Trump has been trampling over press freedom since his first day in office."
President Trump banning the Associated Press from an event over their usage of "Gulf of Mexico" instead of "Gulf of America" may seem more absurd than alarming, but Trump's attacks on the free press are no joke.
[image or embed]
— ACLU (@aclu.org) February 11, 2025 at 5:35 PM
Numerous experts highlighted what they called the unconstitutionality of banning a media outlet from press briefings for political reasons.
"The AP—a major news agency that produces and distributes reports to thousands of newspapers, radio stations, and TV broadcasters around the world—has had long-standing access to the White House," Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, wrote on Friday.
"It is now losing that access because its exercise of editorial discretion doesn't align with the administration’s preferred messaging," Terr added. "That's viewpoint discrimination, and it's unconstitutional."
Berlatsky wrote: "As ABC, Meta, the LA Times, The Washington Post, and Google demonstrate, you lose 100% of the fights you preemptively and despicably surrender. The AP has already won an important victory by refusing to change the Gulf of Mexico to some random other name at the whim of a power-mad orange gasbag."
"If any portion of Trump's agenda is to be stopped, we need people and organizations who are willing to defy him and speak truths he doesn't want to hear," he added. "Despite Trump, the
AP still calls the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of Mexico. In doing so, it's reminding us what freedom looks like. It's also demonstrating us that if you don't want to lose your freedoms, you have to use them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FCC Probe Into NPR, PBS Denounced as 'Attack on the Freedom of the Press'
"The FCC chair is clearly undertaking an effort to bully and intimidate independent journalism, which is a hallmark of authoritarian regimes where democracy is under siege," said one critic.
Jan 31, 2025
U.S. press freedom advocates this week forcefully condemned Republican Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr's investigation into National Public Radio and Public Broadcasting Service that could lead to stripping them of government funding.
"If they weren't ringing already, alarm bells should be going off loudly," said Tim Richardson, program director for journalism and disinformation at PEN America, in a Thursday statement. "By using its investigatory powers, the FCC chair is clearly undertaking an effort to bully and intimidate independent journalism, which is a hallmark of authoritarian regimes where democracy is under siege."
"The Trump administration is clearly embracing such tactics and putting independent media at risk by undermining accountability of elected leaders and risking a less informed public," Richardson added. "We call on the FCC to dispense with such politically motivated investigations."
Jenna Leventoff, senior policy counsel at the ACLU, was similarly critical, saying that "the commission should not bring frivolous investigations into media outlets simply because they do not like their coverage. Investigations like this can chill coverage and threaten the independence of the press, making it harder to hold the government accountable and keep us all informed."
I told @nytimes.com that Carr's claim that NPR and PBS broke sponsorship disclosure rules is an obvious pretext to attack their funding and independence. Carr was appointed to do Trump's censorial bidding. All his moves should be viewed through that lens.This “investigation” is a sham and meant to terrorize NPR and PBS. They have *rigorous* oversight on vetting the “this program brought to you by” statements and literally pages of documentation about it that they give to filmmakers like me. Support your local stations, they’re going to need it.
[image or embed]
— Ariel Waldman (@arielwaldman.com) January 30, 2025 at 2:39 PM
Free Press co-CEO Craig Aaron declared that "his seat as FCC chairman is barely warm, but Brendan Carr is already abusing his power and harassing public broadcasters with a sham investigation designed to scare journalists into silence. This is all part of Carr's far-right, Project 2025-inspired agenda."
"This bogus investigation is an attack on the freedom of the press and a bungling attempt to bash public broadcasters and further weaken their resolve to question the extremism, corruption, and cruelty of the Trump administration," Aaron warned. "This unjustified investigation isn't based on any genuine concern about whether there's too much advertising on public media. It's a blatant attempt to undermine independent, rigorous reporting on the Trump administration."
"Carr may not like public media—and that's no surprise given that he isn't a fan of journalism that holds public officials and billionaires accountable. In this, as in so many other areas under his purview, Chairman Carr is far out of step with the American public and their needs," he continued. "Communities all across the country rely on their local public radio and TV stations to provide trustworthy news reporting and a diversity of opinions. In every survey, the American public indicates it wants more support for public and community media, not less."
Aaron added that "in a healthy democracy, we would be investing enough in our public-media system that it wouldn't need to seek any corporate underwriting. Unfortunately, Carr's cronies in Congress and the Big Media barons they serve have instead for decades tried to zero out funding for public media. They have repeatedly failed because millions of viewers and listeners opposed them."
Carr—whom President Donald Trump first appointed to the FCC in 2017 and recently elevated to chair after he contributed to the Heritage Foundation-led Project 2025—announced the probe in a Wednesday letter to NPR president and CEO Katherine Maher and PBS president and CEO Paula Kerger.
"I am concerned that NPR and PBS broadcasts could be violating federal law by airing commercials," Carr wrote. "I have asked the FCC's Enforcement Bureau, with assistance from the FCC's Media Bureau, to initiate an investigation into the underwriting announcements and related policies of NPR, PBS, and their broadcast member stations."
The chair added:
I will be providing a copy of this letter to relevant members of Congress because I believe this FCC investigation may prove relevant to an ongoing legislative debate. In particular, Congress is actively considering whether to stop requiring taxpayers to subsidize NPR and PBS programming. For my own part, I do not see a reason why Congress should continue sending taxpayer dollars to NPR and PBS given the changes in the media marketplace since the passage of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967.
To the extent that these taxpayer dollars are being used to support a for-profit endeavor or an entity that is airing commercial advertisements, then that would further undermine any case for continuing to fund NPR and PBS with taxpayer dollars.
Some federal lawmakers have already responded on social media. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said that "the letter from Chairman Carr announcing a new FCC investigation into NPR and PBS member stations is baseless. He cites no evidence at all. Instead, this investigation is a dangerous attack on public media and local journalism."
Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.) said that "public television and radio are essential for their local communities. The FCC must not be weaponized to intimidate and silence broadcast media. We should be supporting, not undermining, their contributions to journalism and the marketplace of ideas."
I told @nytimes.com that Carr's claim that NPR and PBS broke sponsorship disclosure rules is an obvious pretext to attack their funding and independence. Carr was appointed to do Trump's censorial bidding. All his moves should be viewed through that lens. www.nytimes.com/2025/01/30/b...
[image or embed]
— Seth Stern (@seth-stern.bsky.social) January 30, 2025 at 5:27 PM
The two Democratic members of the FCC have also responded critically to Carr's move. Commissioner Anna Gomez said that "this appears to be yet another administration effort to weaponize the power of the FCC. The FCC has no business intimidating and silencing broadcast media."
Commissioner Geoffrey Starks said that "public television and radio stations play a significant role in our media ecosystem.
Any attempt to intimidate these local media outlets is a threat to the free flow of information and the marketplace of ideas. The announcement of this investigation gives me serious concern."
Maher said in statement that "NPR programming and underwriting messaging complies with federal regulations, including the FCC guidelines on underwriting messages for noncommercial educational broadcasters, and member stations are expected to be in compliance as well."
"We are confident any review of our programming and underwriting practices will confirm NPR's adherence to these rules," she added. "We have worked for decades with the FCC in support of noncommercial educational broadcasters who provide essential information, educational programming, and emergency alerts to local communities across the United States."
In a statement to NPR media correspondent David Folkenflik, who reported on the probe, Kerger said that "PBS is proud of the noncommercial educational programming we provide to all Americans through our member stations... We work diligently to comply with the FCC's underwriting regulations and welcome the opportunity to demonstrate that to the commission."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Jersey Governor Signs Freedom to Read Act Barring Book Bans
The law, said the Democrat, "cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students."
Dec 09, 2024
Democratic New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy on Monday signed legislation protecting librarians and prohibiting public schools and libraries from banning books—a move that came as Republican state lawmakers are proscribing a record number of titles, many of them works addressing sexual orientation, gender identity, and racial injustice.
Flanked by educators, librarians, and other advocates, Murphy signed
A.3446/S.2421—known as the Freedom to Read Act—in the Princeton Public Library.
"The Freedom to Read Act cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students," said Murphy. "Across the nation, we have seen attempts to suppress and censor the stories and experiences of others. I'm proud to amplify the voices of our past and present, as there is no better way for our children to prepare for the future than to read freely."
According to a statement from Murphy's office:
Under the law, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are barred from excluding books because of the origin, background, or views of the material or of its authors. Further, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are prevented from censoring library material based on a disagreement with a viewpoint, idea, or concept, or solely because an individual finds certain content offensive, unless they are restricting access to developmentally inappropriate material for certain age groups.
The legislation "also provides protections for library staff members against civil and criminal lawsuits related to complying with this law."
New Jersey Association of School Librarians President Karen Grant said that "the Freedom to Read Act recognizes the professionalism, honor, work ethics, and performance of school and public library staff" and "promotes libraries as trusted sources of information and recognizes the many roles that libraries play in students' lives."
"The bill will protect the intellectual freedom of students as well as acknowledge that school libraries are centers for voluntary inquiry, fostering students' growth and development," Grant added. "Additionally, we are grateful for the broad coalition of support from so many organizations for this legislation."
The leader of one of those groups—Garden State Equality executive director Christian Fuscarino—said, "Gov. Murphy just made it clear: In New Jersey, censorship loses, and freedom wins."
"At a time when access to diverse and inclusive materials is under attack across the nation, this legislation sends a powerful message that New Jersey will stand firm in protecting intellectual freedom and fostering a culture of understanding and inclusion," Fuscarino added.
The New Jersey law comes amid a near-tripling in the number of books banned or challenged by Republican state lawmakers and right-wing organizations over the past year, with PEN America counting over 10,000 such titles during the 2023-24 academic year—up from 3,362 titles during the previous scholastic year.
With Murphy's signature, New Jersey joins Minnesota and Illinois in passing state legislation to counter GOP book-banning efforts.
As the Chicago Tribune reported Sunday, "a number of school districts, many of them in deeply conservative areas of south and central Illinois," are giving up state grants rather than adopting principles against book-banning."Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy