March 3, 2026
Memo in Opposition to AB 961 from the American Booksellers Association
Honorable Members of the Wisconsin Senate Committee on Utilities, Technology, and Tourism,
On behalf of the American Booksellers Association, the not-for-profit trade association of independent bookstores, including 90 in Wisconsin, I am writing in strong opposition to AB 961, a bill requiring warning labels on websites that publish or distribute media, including books. While ABA and its members appreciate efforts thus far to fix the problems the bill started with, as written it still creates significant (and likely unintended) liability for independent bookstores.
The Bill (From a Bookseller Perspective)
AB 961 may seem unobjectionable, but when you think about how a bookseller would comply with it, the problems become clear. In its current form, this bill:
- Requires distributors to display a warning label on their websites on pages for material that could be deemed “harmful to children,” whether or not they have been found as such in a court of law; how to determine which books need labels is far from clear
- Mandates specific and subjective language and formatting, compelling distributors to describe certain books as “harmful” and “offensive,” whether or not they agree
- Could leave booksellers open to $2,500 fines per violation, virtually guaranteeing overcompliance to ensure security from liability
Reviewing Thousands of Books Is Impossible
Determining whether a book is “harmful to children” requires complex and subjective judgment calls, not only about the “prurient” nature of every passage in a book, but the literary and artistic value of the work as a whole. To confidently make that judgment for even one book takes time. To make it for the thousands of books, as would be necessary in the average bookstore, would be impossible.
That’s before you consider that bookstores have only remained competitive with Amazon and others by offering a wider range of books online than they can possibly stock in their physical stores. Compliance would functionally force stores to put up potentially unnecessary warning pop-ups on pages for books that may have no sexual content in them for simple lack of ability to review every book carefully. In turn, that will have a chilling effect on books made available and those purchased.
Other Approaches Are More Targeted (And Constitutional)
This approach throws the baby out with the bathwater. It does not have to. Other bills under consideration today tackle what I believe are the intended targets of the authors: social media, pornographic websites, and apps. The more effective way of governing these is age verification for sites with a substantial portion (⅓ or more) of material considered “harmful to children” — an effective means of discriminating between pornography websites and mainstream media vendors. Let those approaches be enough without casting a wide net that will hurt business, literacy, and the future of bookselling. First Amendment case law has been clear that doing so is not only wise, but necessary for Constitutionality.
We all share the goal of protecting children. We also share other goals that will be harmed by this bill. In an age of disconnection and impersonal online ordering, independent bookstores provide connection and community. They create thought-provoking programming (often free) and frequently provide other social services. They create local jobs and keep revenue in the local economy. They are worth protecting, too.
Thank you for reconsidering this bill’s approach. I am available to discuss any of these points at greater length if it would be helpful.
Sincerely,
Philomena Polefrone, PhD
Associate Director of Advocacy and Public Policy
American Booksellers Association