Search

The United States exists in a Post-truth Era with false beliefs such as the moon landing was a hoax, the 2020 presidential election was stolen, the Chinese government created, then distributed the Covid-19 virus and many others. Conspiracy theorists abound in the U.S. cultural and political landscape. Another such belief is that climate change is a myth; it is not occurring. This study explores in a U.S. Constitutional context the ability of public librarians and public libraries to collect and maintain truthful (trusted) grey content regarding climate change. One element of many collection development policies in libraries is accuracy. See, ACLU v. Miami-Dade County School Board, 557 F.3d 1177, 1184 (11th Cir.), cert. denied 130 S. Ct. 659 (2009). Accuracy is also used to assess collection maintenance. Prior content including grey literature created and collected at time when climate change was unproven is no longer accurate and should be withdrawn. Likewise requests by patrons to keep or add content presenting an alternative and inaccurate viewpoint regarding climate change should be withdrawn or refused. In the United States the First Amendment guarantees not only the right to speak but also to receive information, including in a public library, the "quintessential locus of the receipt of information." Kreimer v. Bureau of Police for Town of Morristown, 958 F.2d 1242, 1255 (3d Cir. 1992). Under First Amendment Forum analysis, a public library collection would be considered a non-public forum while the public spaces within the library are a limited public forum. See, Faith Center Church Evangelistic Ministries v. Glover, 462 F.3d 1194, 1204 (9th Cir. 2006). In a non-public forum, government policies that regulate speech must be rationale and viewpoint neutral. See, Case v. Unified School District No. 233, 908 F. Supp. 864, 875 (D. Kan. 1995). The constitutional framework poses the following questions: Do public library patrons have a right to require that inaccurate grey content regarding climate change be retained or added to the collection? Must a public library accept gifts of such content, adding it to its collection? Likewise do those same patrons have the right to object when librarians withdraw inaccurate grey content regarding climate change reflecting an alternative viewpoint? A textual analysis of the extant case law regarding the rights of public librarians and their patrons is undertaken in order answer these questions. In addition to relevant U.S. Supreme Court, the following cases among others are analyzed and discussed. ACLU v. Miami-Dade County School Board, 557 F.3d 1177 (11th Cir.), cert. denied 130 S. Ct. 659 (2009); Elgi v. Chester County Library System [CCLS], (E.D. Pa. 2019); and Via v. City of Richmond, 543 F. Supp. 382 (D.C. Va. 1982). Anticipated results of the research: The cases reviewed should prove instructive regarding the rights and limitations of public librarians and libraries to collect and maintain accurate content including grey literature regarding climate change as well as the rights and limitations of patrons possess to impact that collection development and maintenance process. Strategies and responses to interactions with patrons holding alternative viewpoints on climate change are forwarded to assist public libraries and its librarians in their efforts to collect and maintain truthful, trusted grey content regarding climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]