“I Will Not Comply”: Librarian Luann James Fights Censorship Demands of Rutherford County Library System’s Board

This is a story about a librarian doing everything she can to defend the right to read. It’s a story of courage under pressure, and it’s not only ongoing but also looking as though it might end with a librarian losing her job. It’s a story that’s intended to both honor and uphold these efforts, as well as a story intended to remind every library worker–and every library champion–that this is the kind of responsibility required of the field all the time and especially now. The Library Bill of Rights, which serves as the ethical guidelines for the field, requires library workers to uphold the right to read and to speak out against efforts to remove the First Amendment rights of American citizens as they relate to the public library.

This is a story about Luann James doing just that. It’s a story about how James’s efforts–like the efforts of librarians across the country whose names you may be familiar with (Suzette Baker, Brooky Parks, Terri Lesley, who all successfully won suits against their former employers for wrongful termination for doing their jobs) and those whose names you may be unfamiliar (a host of librarians of color especially, for a myriad reasons)–should inspire similar action by others whose job it is to ensure the right to read.

Rutherford County Library System (RCLS), located southeast of Nashville, Tennessee, has been under fire for years. The board voted to ban all trans books for minors in the library earlier this year, and the board of the Lineburgh Public Library–one of their branches–voted to remove “transgenderism” books just weeks before the county’s board made the decision. Months after passing their anti-trans book policy, the RCLS decided to overturn it. That decision was not based on a change of heart but rather fear of litigation. Spend a little time with the board meeting minutes over the last several years, and you’ll see nearly every meeting has started with people asking to stop book bans, those asking for book bans, and the board needing to address whether or not they’d be removing books from the public library.

Those unfamiliar with the area may recall that in 2023, the town of Murfreesboro, located within Rutherford County, passed an anti-LGBTQ+ law that banned “indecent exposure, public indecency, lewd behavior, nudity or sexual conduct.” “Sexual conduct” in the law included any displays of homosexuality. It would take a few months, but the board would quietly revise this law in response to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. Rutherford County Schools have also been subject to an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit for their commitment to book banning.

Image from the Rutherford County Library Alliance showing members at a board meeting. They’re there in support of their library and the freedom to read.

RCLS’s story took an even sharper turn last fall when the library board’s majority elected to shut down the library in response to a letter from Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett. Hargett’s letter specifically cited Trump’s “Defending Women from Gender Ideology.” It stated that all libraries needed to review their juvenile materials to ensure they comply with Tennessee’s age-appropriateness law, all federal laws, and all federal executive orders (which are not legally binding and do not override the Constitution). Failing to do so would result in state funding being withheld.

Just months earlier, the RCLS hired a new library director. Luann James was hired in June 2026 and began her tenure at Rutherford in late July. She came to the system from York County, South Carolina, with over 25 years in public service. In announcing her appointment, the RCLS board chair Phil King expressed deep enthusiasm for her leadership and expertise. King would announce an early retirement from the board shortly after this statement.

At the July 21, 2025, RCLS board meeting, Cody York was put forward as the new board chair. He’d been on the board for several years, and he’d been an advocate for book bans throughout. There was not unanimous support for his appointment as chair among the board; at least one board member pointed out deep concerns about York being given the position, given his social media presence, which made clear he had a concerning perspective and had been an advocate of book removals in the library.

He was voted into the position anyway. That meant Luann James, the incoming RCLS director, was now at the behest of new leadership with her library board–this group hadn’t hired her, but one with a different makeup and power structure. It’s clear from board meeting minutes thereafter that she was listening and considering the demands being made upon her. She’s attempting to balance her responsibility to protect the library and community from censorship being pushed by far-right actors (including her own board chair) with the reality of being a brand new director trying to learn the ropes of her job (including the responsibilities she has to the board, who oversee, evaluate, and make decisions about her employment as director).

RCLS received its letter from the Secretary of State sometime in late September or early October. The system shut down for their collection review in November, a decision made outside of their normal board meeting schedule. The board holds no November meeting; instead, it combines it with their December meeting.

In December, Luann James stood up to the board. Following public comment, she invoked whistle-blower protections before speaking. Just five months into her role as director, she spoke up about several encounters with York, in which he approached her alone and made several demands. The demands were not only unethical, but some were also illegal. James stated the following:

On her second day of work, York demanded she remove a list of books from the library collection. She was to bypass the formal challenge process, including review by the board itself. Despite York and others’ ongoing efforts to remove books from RCLS, titles had been reviewed in accordance with the library’s formal reconsideration policies (collection policies are crucial!). York asked for personal information of library users, including their names, addresses, ZIP codes, barcodes, how many children and how many adults were in each household, and what they were checking out. This is a blatant violation of the privacy rights patrons are granted when using public libraries. York claims he asked for this information to prevent “fraudulent use” of the library by those outside the library’s taxing zone. The board chair asked to review any open records requests (FOIAs, as they may be known in other localities) before releasing responses to those requesting them. This would violate open records laws. The library already has someone who oversees this process, and it’s not the board chair. RCLS would not be allowed to participate in Banned Books Week. This is becoming increasingly common in libraries where censorship is occurring, especially from the inside.

It took tremendous bravery for James to speak up and to do so when her job was likely still within a probationary period. But James was also not hired under the leadership of York as chair of the board–he was given that position in the weeks before her start date. This, alongside a fiercely proactive, long-time local pro-library organization, the Rutherford County Library Alliance, may be part of why she felt more able to speak up in this way than she had historically while in York County (she was the director there during a rise in censorship, though she’d accepted the role in Rutherford before that board gave itself even greater authoritarian power).

What James did in this moment is what the field expects of its leaders. It’s worthy of recognition in this time of heightened censorship, of rising fascism, and of the ease with which those on a board seek to wield power over the librarians who are doing the work every single day for the entirety of their community.

James didn’t stop there.

She and her team began reviewing nearly 80,000 materials flagged following the letter from the Tennessee Secretary of State and the subsequent shutdown of the libraries. At the February board meeting, she brought recommendations following her and her staff’s tireless efforts to review nearly all of those titles over the last 60 days. Those recommendations included relocating about 450 titles from the juvenile section to the young adult section–the results of inconsistent cataloging or errors from previous eras–as well as relocating six titles from the juvenile collection to the adult collection (notes on all of these recommendations are available here, beginning on page 72). Every other title, well over 70,000, was to remain exactly where it was. Not a single title violated state or federal law, and none would be removed.

In Rutherford County, books moved to the adult section are inaccessible to those under 18 without a permission slip.

The board majority initially denied her recommendations. They then moved to update their denial, with the caveat that “any subsequent board action on specific titles submitted by Ms. James that is more restrictive will supersede it.” Any titles or recommendations on actions submitted by the board would be reviewed in subsequent meetings.

After spending untold hours to get the work done and given the power to do so as the library’s director via the board’s hiring her for the job, the board’s majority then overrode her professional opinion and wasted tremendous time, energy, and taxpayer money. The board made clear that they would be the ones to make the book banning decisions. This is not the job of a library board, but they gave themselves the job anyway.

Image from the Rutherford County Library Alliance showing members at a board meeting. They’re there in support of their library and the freedom to read.

It’s now March 2026, and at the board meeting, the board elected to remove the Library Bill of Rights, the American Library Association Code of Ethics, the Freedom to Read Statement, the Freedom to View Statement, and the American Library Association Guidelines for Development of Policies and Procedures from its policy manual–all tools which protect library users from having their access to materials denied and which protect library user information from being used inappropriately. This action directly addressed the concerns James raised in December.

Then the board heard from chair York, who requested that 116 books be moved from the youth collection to the adult collection. His reasoning for most, as you can see in the linked titles, is “gender confusion”–the copy/paste reasoning from the right for targeting any LGBTQ+ book. Board treasurer Beth Duffield also wanted 16 titles moved. Her reasons are largely the same as York’s and also include puberty books that are, apparently, “obscene” for those going through puberty to see. Again, this would ban those books for anyone under 18 without parental permission, despite the fact that the books are written and published for those under 18.

Against the recommendations made by James at the prior meeting, the board voted to relocate–and thereby ban from minors–132 books from the library.

This is where James has stepped in again: she’s stated that she will not move those books, even if it means she loses her job. Her job as director of the RCLS–her job as a librarian, period–is to protect the First Amendment Rights of all.

This is the letter she wrote the board days after their 8-3 vote to relocate over 100 books, all of which James herself had already determined were appropriate in their current locations:

Good afternoon everyone.

As the Director of the Rutherford County Library System (RCLS), I am professionally and ethically bound to uphold the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Public libraries serve as vital repositories of diverse ideas, both popular and unpopular. Restricting access to these materials through subjective relocation or removal constitutes a violation of the community’s right to information and a direct infringement on the principles of free speech. Our libraries are funded by and for the citizens; therefore, the right to access information—free from government interference—is a protected hallmark of our democracy.

The 8-3 vote by the Library Board on March 16th to relocate over 100+ LGBTQIA children’s titles to the adult section is a clear act of viewpoint discrimination. Furthermore, the vote to move the books was done without following the
library’s established Request for Reconsideration policy.

My duty to protect public access is not merely a personal opinion; it is a core tenet of the American Library Association’s Code of Ethics. As an arm of the county government, the Board cannot legally limit the public’s access to
materials owned by the people based on the content of the ideas expressed within them.

Therefore, I will not comply with the Board’s decision to relocate these books. Doing so would violate the First Amendment right of all citizens of Rutherford County and myself. Consequently, I would compromise my professional
obligation to oppose government-mandated viewpoint discrimination.

I want you to know that I am more than willing to discuss this decision with members of the Board at any time. I trust you understand my position expressed in this letter. As the Director of RCLS, I must uphold the obligations owed to the
citizens of Rutherford County, and in particular the duty owed by the public library to its patrons, to allow access to views expressed by authors to benefit the public’s right to read and access protected speech.

Sincerely,
Luanne James

This is an act that all library workers should take when faced with such censorship and board overstepping. It’s an act many library workers cannot take, for every reason one can imagine, including those standing before James: potential job loss, retaliation, and more.

James’s decision not to remove the books is being hailed by freedom to read advocates as heroic, and it is. She’s continued to show a willingness to speak up and out about the board’s behavior. While her livelihood is on the line, she’s taken the risk because it’s her duty as a librarian and to her community.

“Luanne James is the epitome of a true American Patriot. She is demonstrating to the world the importance of professional librarians in our communities. The bravery to stand up and say, “No, I will not violate my ethics and go against the constitution of the United States”, is the kind of leadership we need to see more of. She is an inspiration to all, and I could not be more thankful that she is a member of our community,” said Keri Lambert, Rutherford County Library Alliance Vice-President.

“This courageous leadership is exactly what Rutherford County is looking for and all of us at RCLA couldn’t be more proud of her.” Said Tatiana Silvas, Rutherford County Library Alliance’s Communications Director. “She’s a hero, there’s no other way to describe her.”

The fight isn’t over. It’s only continuing to amp up, and the RCLS board is already planning where and how they’ll respond to James’s decision not to relocate the items. York told the Daily News Journal that it’s the board’s job to establish library policy and that James’s refusal to cooperate is “insubordination” that “cannot be ignored.”

James did not ignore policy, though. James followed policy in the thorough review of titles that she and her staff undertook under tremendous pressure and a tight timeline. It was the board that elected to ignore policy by granting itself the power to determine which books would be removed without question or review, in violation of established policy.

“[York[ seems to be missing the point that the directive by the board is not lawful. In fact, by declaring the only policies needed in their policy manual are the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, they have established precedent that their directive is not lawful,” said the Rutherford County Library Alliance. “Remember: “I was just following orders” is not a valid legal defence. Luanne James is a true American patriot, and we could not be more grateful for her standing up for the rights of everyone in Rutherford County.”

So what happens now?

The RCLS board has elected to add an emergency meeting on Monday, March 30, at 5 p.m., at the Historic Courthouse on the Square (Murfreesboro). Library advocates in the area are asked to attend, and if you’re unable to attend, write a letter to the board with your thoughts on their plans to discipline a library director for fulfilling her job duties. The email address to reach the entire RCLS board is no longer working, so you’ll need to reach out to them individually. Here’s their information:

Cody York (Chair) [email protected] Sam Huddleston (Vice Chair) [email protected] Susan Quesenberry (Secretary) [email protected] Angela Frederick [email protected] Dina Piazza [email protected] Darrell Thomas [email protected] Beth Duffield (Treasurer) [email protected] Allison Belt [email protected] Jeffrey Wiencek [email protected] John Curtis [email protected] Lynn Reynolds [email protected]

If you attend the meeting in person, you’re encouraged to show up early–no later than 4 p.m. strongly recommended. The Rutherford County Library Alliance will hand out purple shirts, generously provided by the ACLU-TN, and books, generously provided by the National Coalition Against Censorship, to attendees in support of James.

If you’re not in the area, consider sending the board an email highlighting the spectacular job their director is doing by following the policy and the ethical guidelines of her profession. She’s doing everything possible to protect her community’s rights by refusing to follow a political agenda that strips taxpayers of the freedom to read.

Wherever you are, share James’s story. If you’re a library worker, look to what she’s doing as guidance for where and how it is essential to step into the arena and protect your library and its users. This shouldn’t be a unique story because censorship at this level, for this length of time, shouldn’t be happening in America at all; it shouldn’t be a unique story at this level, for this length of time, because library workers abide by the Library Bill of Rights, which outlines the role the profession has in defending the right to read.

This story and James’s bravery are a reminder, too, of the importance of having local, grassroots support for libraries and intellectual freedom. The Rutherford County Library Alliance has been doing this work for years. If you’re local, get involved with their efforts. If you’re not local, see if your community has a similar advocacy group. If not, consider this your opportunity to get one started.