Under Tennessee's Age-Appropriate Materials Act, what procedures govern challenges to school library books, who decides if a book gets removed, and can a removed book still be used in classroom instruction?

Plain-English summary

Tennessee's Age-Appropriate Materials Act of 2022, codified at Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3801 et seq., requires every local board of education and public charter school governing body to adopt procedures for keeping school library collections age-appropriate and consistent with the school's educational mission. The 2025 opinion answers seven questions a state representative submitted about how the Act works in practice.

The headline points:

1. Local school boards have broad discretion over the procedures for developing and reviewing library collections. The statute sets requirements (the policy "must include" three procedures) but leaves the details to local boards.
2. Students, parents, and employees can request a review of any specific book. The local board has 60 days from the request to decide whether the book complies with the Act.
3. If the local board determines a book is non-compliant, removal is mandatory. "Then the material must be removed" is statutory language under § 49-6-3803(f).
4. The Act covers two categories of impermissible material. § 49-6-3803(b)(1) covers material containing nudity or descriptions/depictions of certain sexual conduct, excess violence, or sadomasochistic abuse. The disjunctive "or" in the statute means any of these triggers removal, not all of them.
5. A book removed from the library can still appear in curriculum. Section 49-6-3802(1) defines "library collection" to exclude "materials made available to students as part of a course curriculum." So a book removed from the open-access library can still be assigned in a class.
6. Appeal goes to the State Textbook and Instructional Materials Quality Commission. Either when the local board fails to decide within 60 days, or when a board's decision is contested under § 49-6-2201(m)(1)(C). The Commission's decisions apply statewide.

What this means for you

If you serve on a local school board

Your statutory obligations under § 49-6-3803(d) are three: adopt a policy with (1) procedures for developing age-appropriate collections, (2) procedures for receiving and evaluating feedback from students/parents/employees, and (3) procedures for periodic review. You have wide latitude on the specifics (intake form design, who reviews initially, escalation paths) but the policy must address all three.

When you receive a feedback request asking you to evaluate a book, the 60-day clock starts. § 49-6-3803(e). If you let it lapse, the requestor can take the matter to the State Textbook and Instructional Materials Quality Commission, which then evaluates the book and whose decision applies statewide. So the 60-day deadline is operationally critical: missing it transfers control out of your district.

If you decide the material is non-compliant, removal is not optional. The statute uses "must be removed." The opinion takes a hard line on this. You do, however, retain discretion to allow the same material in curriculum, and that distinction is meaningful for educators trying to use specific texts in instruction.

If you are a parent or guardian considering a challenge

You have a direct path to request review of any book in your child's school library. § 49-6-3803(d)(2). The local board (or its designee under the policy) must respond within 60 days. If they do not, you can ask the State Textbook and Instructional Materials Quality Commission to evaluate the book. Document the date you submit your request, in writing, so the 60-day deadline is unambiguous.

You should also know what the Act actually covers. Section 49-6-3803(b)(1) is broad. The "or" structure means a book can be subject to removal because it contains any one of the listed categories, not all of them. The nudity definition cross-references Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-901, which is broad on its face but does not contain a contextual exception for educational, scientific, or artistic depictions in the library context.

If you are a school librarian

Your task on the front end is curating with the standards in mind. The Act explicitly provides that local boards retain discretion to determine what is "suitable for, and consistent with, the educational mission of the school," and that determination is not codified. So your professional judgment, as informed by your district's adopted policy, is the gating filter.

Once a challenge comes in, the determination process is typically a board-level call (or a designee's call under the local policy). Be ready to explain your selection rationale in suitability terms: educational purpose, age-appropriateness for the school's grade range, fit with curriculum needs.

If you are a teacher who wants to use a removed book in class

The curriculum exception is real but bounded. The Act applies to "[m]aterials in a library collection," § 49-6-3803(a), and excludes "materials made available to students as part of a course curriculum" from the definition of "library collection," § 49-6-3802(1). So a book that was removed from your school library can still be assigned in your course, consistent with state and local curriculum requirements. That last clause matters: your district's curriculum approval process and the state's textbook approval process still apply. The opinion does not let you go around your district's curriculum review.

If you are a First Amendment attorney evaluating the Act

The opinion notes the Act's bright-line removal mandate when material falls within § 49-6-3803(b)(1). The constitutional analysis is not the focus of this opinion, but the AG cites Pico (a plurality on First Amendment limits on book removal) and Miami-Dade County School Board (an Eleventh Circuit decision treating these questions as a "core educational policy matter") in framing local discretion. Litigants challenging the Act on First Amendment or vagueness grounds will note that those cases predate the Act and may not control modern challenges.

Common questions

Q: Who actually makes the removal decision under the Act?
A: The local board of education or public charter school governing body, the "local school body." Local boards may delegate the initial determination through their adopted policy (e.g., to a designee or committee), but the statute frames the responsibility at the board level.

Q: How fast does the local board have to respond to a challenge?
A: Sixty days from the date the student, parent, or employee submits feedback under § 49-6-3803(d)(2). If the board does not respond in time, the challenger can ask the State Textbook and Instructional Materials Quality Commission to step in.

Q: Does the Act require removal of educational books on biology, art, or anatomy that contain images of the human body?
A: The Act sets a removal mandate when a local school body determines material contains nudity as defined in Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-901. The opinion is clear that the duty to remove "does not turn on whether [the material] also contain[s] descriptions or depictions of sexual excitement, sexual conduct, excess violence, or sadomasochistic abuse." The disjunctive "or" in § 49-6-3803(b)(1) means any of the listed categories, standing alone, can trigger removal once the local body so determines. The Act does not codify an exception for educational, scientific, or artistic context, though the local board's threshold judgment retains some discretion in deciding whether the material crosses the statutory line.

Q: What is the appeals path?
A: The statute contemplates appellate review by the State Textbook and Instructional Materials Quality Commission in two scenarios: (1) when the local board fails to decide within 60 days, and (2) when a separate § 49-6-2201(m)(1)(C) timeline allows appeal of a removal determination. The Commission's decision applies to all local school bodies in the state.

Q: Can a local board adopt removal procedures beyond what the Act requires?
A: Yes. Section 49-6-3803(g) explicitly permits local boards to adopt additional procedures, and § 49-6-3803(e) confirms the Act's procedures are not exclusive.

Q: Does the Act apply to public charter schools?
A: Yes. The statute defines "local school body" to include both local boards of education and "public charter school governing bodies."

Q: What if the local board decides a book is not problematic?
A: The Act contemplates that determination but does not provide an automatic right of appeal to a parent or student dissatisfied with that result. § 49-6-2201(m)(1)(B)(ii) anticipates that a local body might create such an internal appeal process, but the Act does not require one.

Q: Are removed books destroyed or stored?
A: The Act does not prescribe what happens to removed materials. Common practice is to store them centrally (e.g., at the district central office) so they remain available for legitimate curriculum use under the curriculum exception.

Background and statutory framework

The Age-Appropriate Materials Act of 2022 (codified at Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3801 et seq., as amended) is part of a broader trend of state-level legislation regulating school library content. Tennessee's Act is structured around three pillars:

1. A suitability standard. "[M]aterials in a library collection must be suitable for the age and maturity levels of the students who may access the materials and must be suitable for, and consistent with, the educational mission of the school." § 49-6-3803(a).

2. A required local policy with three procedures. § 49-6-3803(d).

3. Mandatory removal of non-compliant material. Once a local body determines material falls within § 49-6-3803(b)(1) or (b)(2), "the material must be removed." § 49-6-3803(f).

The two prohibited categories track different legal theories. Subsection (b)(1) targets material that, in whole or in part, contains nudity (as defined by cross-reference to § 39-17-901) or descriptions or depictions of certain conduct categories. Subsection (b)(2) targets material that is "patently offensive" or "appeals to the prurient interest" (terms drawn from obscenity-law tradition).

The curriculum exception in § 49-6-3802(1) is a meaningful escape valve. It distinguishes the open-access library context (browsable by any student) from the curricular context (assigned in a class with teacher supervision and parental notice). The same book can be appropriate in one and not the other.

The State Textbook and Instructional Materials Quality Commission's role is the centralizing mechanism. Its decisions on appeal apply statewide, ensuring some consistency across districts. § 49-6-2201(m)(1)(C), (D).

The opinion's discussion of Hazelwood, Pico, and Miami-Dade County situates the Act within a federal-court framework that has historically recognized substantial local discretion over library content decisions for K-12 students. The opinion does not adjudicate any First Amendment challenge to the Act, leaving that for actual litigation.

Citations and references

Statutes:
- Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3801 et seq. (Age-Appropriate Materials Act)
- Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-2201 (Textbook Commission)
- Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-901 (Cross-referenced definitions)

Cases:
- Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988), local school officials' role in education
- Bd. of Educ., Island Trees Union Free Sch. Dist. No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982), plurality on library book removal
- ACLU of Fla., Inc. v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 557 F.3d 1177 (11th Cir. 2009), library material decisions as core educational policy
- United States v. Banks, 679 F.3d 505 (6th Cir. 2012), disjunctive "or" in statutory text

Source

• Landing page: https://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/opinions.html
• Original PDF: https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attorneygeneral/documents/ops/2025/op25-009.pdf

Original opinion text

STATE OF TENNESSEE
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
March 28, 2025
Opinion No. 25-009
Obligations under the Age-Appropriate Materials Act of 2022

Question 1
What are the proper procedures and applicable standards under Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-
3801 et seq., Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(b)(1), and Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-901 for school
library books and materials to be challenged for removal or removed?

Opinion 1
The referenced statutes require local boards of education and public charter school
governing bodies ("local school bodies") to adopt procedures to maintain school libraries that are
age-appropriate for K-12 students and consistent with schools' educational missions. The statutes
grant those local school bodies broad discretion to develop and implement the details of those
procedures. And while the statutes specify standards for removing materials that are unsuitable
for K-12 students' age or maturity, they allow local school bodies to determine what materials
serve a school's educational purpose.

Question 2
Do the above statutes provide multiple or alternative methods for school library materials
to be challenged and/or removed?

Opinion 2
The referenced statutes generally provide local school bodies with the flexibility to develop
procedures for facilitating challenges to, and removal of, school library materials. But the statutes
require local school bodies to determine whether a material is age-appropriate and suitable within
sixty days of a student's, parent's, or employee's request for review. If the local school body fails
to make a timely determination, the student, parent, or employee may ask the State Textbook and
Instructional Materials Quality Commission to evaluate the material.

Local school bodies must also maintain school library collections consistent with Tenn.
Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(b)(1) and (2) by: (a) adopting procedures to develop collections that are
age-appropriate and suitable for, and consistent with, the educational mission of a particular
school, and (b) periodically reviewing the appropriateness and suitability of materials in those
collections. But local school bodies have discretion in how to implement those procedures, as well
as to adopt removal procedures beyond those the statutes specify.

Question 3
What is the proper procedure for determining whether a school library book or material
should be removed under Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(b)(1) and who makes that determination?

Opinion 3
See response to Question 2.

Question 4
Does Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(b)(1) require the removal of books or materials on
subjects of biology, science, anatomy, mythology, and/or art which contain nudity, as defined in
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-901, when the statutorily referenced body parts lack opaque coverings?

Opinion 4
When a local school body determines that material falls within Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-
3803(b)(1), it must be removed.

Question 5
Does the language of Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(b)(1) require the removal of
educational books containing nudity such as biology, anatomy and art? Or does the language of
Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(b)(1) only encompass sexually explicit depictions of nudity,
referenced in Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(b)(1) as sexual excitement, sexual conduct, excess
violence, or sadomasochistic abuse?

Opinion 5
Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(b)(1)'s obligation to remove books containing nudity does
not turn on whether they also contain descriptions or depictions of sexual excitement, sexual
conduct, excess violence, or sadomasochistic abuse.

Question 6
If books or materials must be removed from school libraries under Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-
6-3803(b)(1), does state law allow those same books to be utilized in classroom instruction?

Opinion 6
Yes, subject to other conditions.

Question 7
If books or materials are required to be removed from school libraries under Tenn. Code
Ann. § 49-6-3803(b)(1), does state law allow those same books to be utilized in classroom
instruction if the book is part of the state approved curriculum standard?

Opinion 7
Yes, subject to other conditions.

ANALYSIS

The Age-Appropriate Materials Act of 2022, as amended ("the Act"), gives Tennessee
local school bodies broad discretion to adopt and implement procedures to maintain a library
collection that is age-appropriate for school children and suitable for, and consistent with, a
school's educational mission. The Act requires schools operated by local school bodies to
maintain on their websites a current list of materials in the school's library collection, and it
imposes three additional requirements: Local school bodies must (1) adopt a policy for developing
and periodically reviewing school library collections, including reviews at the behest of a student,
parent or guardian, or school employee; (2) respond to such student/parent/employee requests to
evaluate material with a determination of age-appropriateness and suitability (or not) within sixty
days; and (3) remove any material that the local school body determines is inappropriate for K-12
students or inconsistent with the school's educational mission. Although the Act does not
prescribe specific procedures for observing these requirements, it sets out certain standards for
determining that materials are not age-appropriate and must be removed. Prohibited materials
include those that contain nudity, or descriptions or depictions of certain sexual conduct, as defined
in the Act. The Act on its face applies only to school library collections and does not preclude the
use of otherwise-covered materials in course curriculum.

1-3. The Act requires local school bodies to adopt procedures to achieve certain ends,
generally speaking, to maintain school library collections consistent with the Act, but it grants
them discretion in deciding how to accomplish those purposes. The Act also provides standards
for identifying inappropriate materials.

The Act mandates that "[m]aterials in a library collection must be suitable for the age and
maturity levels of the students who may access the materials and must be suitable for, and
consistent with, the educational mission of the school." Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(a). To that
end, the Act requires each local school body to "adopt a policy for developing and reviewing
school library collections." Id. § 49-6-3803(d).

That policy "must include" three procedures. First, local school bodies must adopt a
procedure for developing a library collection at each school that is appropriate for student age and
maturity levels and consistent with the school's educational mission. Id. § 49-6-3803(d)(1).
Second, local school bodies must adopt a procedure to "receive and evaluate feedback from a
student, a student's parent or guardian, or a school employee" about a material or materials in the
library collection "of the student's or employee's school." Id. § 49-6-3803(d)(2). Finally, local
school bodies must adopt a procedure to "periodically review the library collection at each school
to ensure" its compliance with the Act. Id. § 49-6-3803(d)(3). The Act does not prescribe the
details of these procedures, such as directing the methods by which students and other parties may
provide feedback on materials. And the Act also allows local school bodies and individual schools
to develop and implement policies for removing materials from a library collection in addition to
those the Act requires. Id. § 49-6-3803(g). Additionally, the Act explicitly provides that the
procedures in the Act are not the exclusive procedures for removing materials from a school's
library collection. Id. § 49-6-3803(e).

The Act requires local school bodies to respond to any request to review library material
under § 49-6-3803(d)(2) within a certain time period. Local school bodies have sixty days from
the date on which a student/parent/employee provides feedback to "evaluate and determine"
whether the material complies with the Act. Id. § 49-6-3803(e).

In addition to outlining procedures for reviewing and removing materials, the Act requires
removal of materials satisfying certain standards. Whether review proceeds under § 49-6-
3803(d)(1), (d)(2), or (d)(3), if the local school body "determines that material contained in the
school's library collection is not appropriate for the age and maturity level of the students who
may access the materials," or is unsuitable for or inconsistent with the school's "educational
mission," "then the material must be removed" from the collection. Id. § 49-6-3803(f) (emphasis
added).

The Code contemplates appellate review by the State Textbook and Instructional Materials
Quality Commission in certain circumstances. First, a local school body's failure to provide a
determination within sixty days allows the student, parent, or employee to ask the Commission to
evaluate the material. Id. § 49-6-3803(e). Second, a separate statute requires the Commission to
create a timeline and process for "a student, a student's parent or guardian, or a school employee"
to appeal such a determination of inappropriateness or unsuitability by a local school body that
results in the material's removal from the school's library. Id. § 49-6-2201(m)(1)(C). The
Commission's decision, whether that challenged material is "appropriate" or "inappropriate,"
applies to every local school body in the State. Id.; see also id. § 49-6-2201(m)(1)(D). And
depending on the Commission's findings on appeal, that statute dictates that the challenged
material "shall" be "include[d]" or "remove[d]" from each of the local school bodies' libraries. Id.
§ 49-6-2201(m)(1)(C)(ii).

The Act defines two categories of material that are "not appropriate for the age or maturity
level" of K-12th graders and "must not be maintained in a school's library collection." Id. § 49-
6-3803(b). The first category covers material that "[i]n whole or in part contains nudity, or
descriptions or depictions of sexual excitement, sexual conduct, excess violence, or
sadomasochistic abuse." Id. § 49-6-3803(b)(1). The second category encompasses material that
is "patently offensive" or "appeals to the prurient interest." Id. § 49-6-3803(b)(2). The Act cross-
references Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-901 to define each of the relevant terms. That Section
defines nudity, for example, to mean:

the showing of the human male or female genitals, pubic area, or
buttocks with less than a fully opaque covering or the showing of
the female breast with less than a fully opaque covering of any
portion below the top of the nipple, or the depiction of covered male
genitals in a discernibly turgid state.

Id. § 39-17-901(9).

The Act does not, however, define what material is "suitable for, and consistent with, the
educational mission of the school." See, e.g., id. § 49-6-3803(d)(1). So local school bodies retain
discretion to prescribe criteria for determining what material is unsuitable for, or inconsistent with,
a school's educational mission and must be removed on that basis. See id. § 49-6-3803(e), (f).
And while the State Textbook and Instructional Materials Quality Commission is charged with
issuing guidance for local school bodies to use when determining whether materials are age
appropriate and educationally suitable, id. § 49-6-2201(m)(1)(A), those local bodies retain
discretion to make the initial determination of whether particular materials fit that definition, id.
§ 49-6-3803(d), (e). So long as a local body makes a timely determination, moreover, no student,
parent, or teacher has an automatic right to appeal the body's decision to the Commission. Cf. id.
§ 49-6-2201(m)(1)(B)(ii) (foreseeing that a local school body might create such an appeal process).

Preserving local discretion in these ways makes good sense. After all, "the education of
the Nation's youth is primarily the responsibility of parents, teachers, and . . . local school
officials," in addition to state officials. Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260, 273
(1988). And local officials have long exercised that discretion, including by excluding or
removing "vulgar" books from their libraries based on the books' "educational suitability." See
Bd. of Educ., Island Trees Union Free Sch. Dist. No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 871 (Brennan, J.)
(plurality op.). Indeed, federal courts have recognized that such questions are "a core educational
policy matter" for "local school boards." See, e.g., ACLU of Fla., Inc. v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Sch.
Bd., 557 F.3d 1177, 1225-26 (11th Cir. 2009).

In short, the Act imposes general procedural requirements and gives local school bodies
discretion in how to implement them, consistent with local school boards' traditional prerogative
to determine material suitability. But the Act requires removal of materials when a local school
body determines they meet the Act's standards for inappropriate material.

4-7. The Act provides that materials containing nudity cannot appear in a covered school's
library collection, regardless of whether the nudity's depiction is sexually explicit. But such
materials nonetheless may be used as part of a course curriculum.

By its plain text, the Act provides that "nudity," the depiction of body parts as defined in
the Act with "less than a fully opaque covering," "must not be maintained" in a covered school's
library collection. See id. §§ 39-17-901(9), 49-6-3803(b)(1). Although the same provision also
bars material describing or depicting "sexual excitement, sexual conduct, excess violence, or
sadomasochistic abuse," § 49-6-3803(b)(1)'s use of the disjunctive "or" makes clear that nudity in
general, not just nudity associated with "sexual excitement," etc., falls within the Act's coverage.
See id. § 49-6-3803(b)(1) (barring material that "contains nudity, or descriptions or depictions of
sexual excitement, sexual conduct, excess violence, or sadomasochistic abuse" (emphasis added));
see also, e.g., United States v. Banks, 679 F.3d 505, 506 (6th Cir. 2012). So if a local school body
determines that material contains nudity as defined in the Act, the General Assembly has mandated
that it "must be removed." Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-3803(f).

But the Act does not require local school bodies to exclude covered materials from schools
altogether. It applies only to "[m]aterials in a library collection." Id. § 49-6-3803(a). And the Act
expressly excludes "materials made available to students as part of a course curriculum" from the
definition of "[l]ibrary collection." Id. § 49-6-3802(1). Thus, the Act allows that otherwise
covered materials may be used in classroom instruction, consistent with state and local curriculum
requirements.

JONATHAN SKRMETTI
Attorney General and Reporter

J. MATTHEW RICE
Solicitor General

VIRGINIA N. ADAMSON
Strategic Litigation Counsel &
Assistant Solicitor General

JOSEPH M. FIORILE
Strategic Litigation Unit Honors Fellow

Requested by:
The Honorable Charlie Baum
State Representative
425 Rep. John Lewis Way N.
Suite 620 Cordell Hull Building
Nashville, Tennessee 37243