> since I am funding my local public library, and since the library has a limited budget, I expect to have a say as a voter as to what books I want it to stock
Then, put simply, it's not a library. It's a store of books. Libraries have deeper historic, political and legal significance than books the majority wants around. (You can call it whatever you want. But it shouldn't receive federal funding nor the legal protections we extend to libraries.)
> there is very little interest in political action directed to remove books from non-school public libraries
> Libraries have deeper historic, political and legal significance than books the majority wants around.
If a public library doesn’t do what the majority of people want, why should they keep it around? In our political system, the people are the sovereign, and they have the ultimate right to decide how they want their government to operate, limited by constitution and other law. Public libraries don’t have a right to independently exist as some sort of feudal benefice, with right to extort the local peasants attached to it. Their existence and operations stem solely from the will of the people, and they will it to work differently or not at all, so shall it be.
> It's a prominent and increasing trend
As far as I can tell, the article linked is overwhelmingly talking about school libraries. Have you read it? I hope you haven’t, otherwise it would be rather dishonest of you to give it as evidence to support the point about non-school libraries.
Then, put simply, it's not a library. It's a store of books. Libraries have deeper historic, political and legal significance than books the majority wants around. (You can call it whatever you want. But it shouldn't receive federal funding nor the legal protections we extend to libraries.)
> there is very little interest in political action directed to remove books from non-school public libraries
It's a prominent and increasing trend [1].
[1] https://www.ala.org/news/press-releases/2023/03/record-book-...