State of America’s Libraries: Library Services and Incarceration

I profiled the many resources created through the Expanding Information Access for Incarcerated People grant project in the American Library Association’s State of America’s Libraries: A Snapshot of 2025. My article provides a guide to the grant work, background on library services and incarceration, and highlights some of the work being done across the field. (Note: the American Library Association is a collaborator in the grant work.)

The article closes with a description of the shifting landscape impacting library services and incarceration, which I’ve included below.

The ability of jails, detention centers, and prison systems to censor materials continues to profoundly shape the experiences of people who are incarcerated. Censorship practices can be irrational, but they often also fall along lines of race, gender, and sexuality. Notable practices have included dictionaries in languages other than English at facilities in Michigan and censorship of materials created by incarcerated people.

Libraries that provide Reference by Mail services are grappling with how to navigate the professional ethic of patron privacy given the rise of jails and prisons partnering with private technology companies to digitize and retain mailed communications. Interruptions in federal funding have, at times, threatened prison library services.

The increasing detention of people who read in languages other than English is exacerbating a distinct need for information and materials in the languages in which people read. The rise in anti-transgender legislation informs and shapes prison policies, escalating incarcerated transgender people’s inability to access accurate information. Librarians and advocates are trying to provide resources and recreational materials like those described above within jails, juvenile detentions, and prisons across the country. Where available, these are cherished lifelines.

Trends that limit incarcerated people’s access to libraries can be held against recent successes. Groups like Initiate Justice demonstrate the possibility of creating collaborative
information-based projects that are built around the needs of people directly impacted by incarceration. Initiate Justice is changing California state practices through legislative education and advocacy, including by introducing greater transparency around censorship practices in California prisons.

The Prison Libraries Act was introduced early in 2026. If passed, it will result in grants that can be used for “creating libraries in prisons without libraries and in prisons that otherwise would not have the means to scale library services.” ALA President Sam Helmick expressed the importance of the Act in a press release from Representative Emanuel Cleaver, II’s office, writing: “Prison libraries open doors of opportunity and provide essential literacy support to address the urgent information needs of millions of incarcerated people in the United States.” Passage of this Act will result in a remarkable increase in library services for incarcerated people.

The stark need for additional funding is a reminder that many institutional libraries are maintained by incarcerated library workers, often for very little pay. Incarcerated library workers desire opportunities for professional development and want to use the skills they’ve built in their future employment. Librarians looking for guidance and ideas will find these in ALA’s Standards for Library Services for the Incarcerated or Detained (Note: the Standards are available as a downloadable PDF at this link.) The Standards offer general guidelines and present real-world examples of successful programs alongside aspirational visions for moving ahead. Librarians across the country are drawing from the Standards to create new services, models, and resources that will broaden the field of academic, legal, prison, and public librarianship.

The full State of America’s Libraries: A Snapshot of 2025 is available online at this link.

Censorship in Prisons & Prison Banned Books Week

Censorship is common in prisons–from blanket bans on vendors to specific titles. In preparation for Prison Banned Book Weeks (which begins today!), colleagues and I discussed the realities of censorship inside. You can view the recorded training on censorship in carceral settings by registering at

https://www.everylibraryinstitute.org/censorship_in_carceral_settings.

Interested in joining the campaign against pervasive book bans inside? PEN America has released a new report and toolkit for raising awareness of these practices and engaging in advocacy. Their report and action steps are located at

https://pen.org/campaign/prison-banned-books-week-2023/.

The toolkit for a Banned Books Week social media campaign is at

https://pen.org/prison-banned-books-week-toolkit/.

Want to see what books are banned in prisons in your state? The Marshall Project is continuing to collect this information and to make it publicly available at

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2022/12/21/prison-banned-books-list-find-your-state.

White Paper on Technology in Carceral Facilities

As part of San Francisco Public Library’s “Expanding Information Access for Incarcerated People” grant project, we have recently released a white paper titled “Technology in Carceral Facilities: Trends, Limitations, and Opportunities for Libraries.”

This white paper covers relevant literature published from January 2020 to December 2022. It glosses emerging and continuing trends in the use of technology in carceral facilities. It provides an overview of trends in recent publications in library and information science and similar fields about how technologies inside shape people’s experiences of incarceration and reentry. It closes by highlighting work by libraries that may indicate possibilities for supporting incarcerated people and people in reentry through making library services and programs that utilize technology available within facilities, and by offering some examples of how libraries can support patron’s digital literacy development after they are released.

The white paper is freely available online at

Technology in Carceral Facilities: Trends, Limitations, and Opportunities for Libraries.”

or through the grant page at

Expanding Information Access for Incarcerated People.”

Content Restrictions and Media Review in Prisons

ITHAKA S+R has released a report that brings together and analyses the content restrictions and media review practices of prison systems in the United States. The post announcing the report highlights that:

  • Key terms and language are common across DOC censorship policies. Despite strong similarities in language and framing, however, the policies and procedures related to common terms differ greatly across states.
  • Forty-two of 51 media review directives limit the vendors from which materials can be purchased. This type of “content-neutral” restriction limits the availability of information and may increase costs and logistical burdens on higher education in prison programs, students, and autodidactic learners.
  • Forty-four of 51 media review directives have clauses addressing and limiting access to sexually explicit or obscene content. The reasons for this are historically complicated, but these policies are currently intended to maintain an environment free of sexual harassment. In some cases, however, these policies explicitly target LGBTQ+ content. Such policies can affect access to educational materials from art history and biology to contemporary queer literature.
  • The legal power of DOC to surveil and censor is grounded in the protection of “security, good order, or discipline.” In practice, the term frequently serves as a catchall, providing broad latitude to censor media. This covers a startling amount of ground, justifying everything from banning books on community organizing or union history, to prohibiting access to fantasy novels that have maps of fictional lands.
  • Content protection clauses or carve outs exist and primarily allow access to educational or culturally significant content. While such provisions ostensibly allow access to publications that might otherwise be censored, the way these policies are framed often narrowly limits application.
  • Publication review and censorship appeals processes are addressed to some extent in nearly all policies. However, appeals processes often inequitably burden people who are incarcerated and the programs that seek to serve them.

The full report includes a media review policy that can be used to craft a more transparent and less arbitrary review process for materials.

Interested in learning more about banned books inside of prisons? The Marshall Project has recently released a new tool for viewing banned books lists by state.

I am guest editor on a forthcoming issue of the Journal of Intellectual Freedom & Privacy on the topic of carceral systems and censorship. Look out for the issue later this year!

ALA Report on Libraries and Reentry

The American Library Association has published a report on how libraries support people who have been incarcerated after they are released from jails and prisons. The report features library services provided across the United States. It highlights innovative and needed programs that provide models for library systems considering how they can better support people impacted by policing and incarceration. From the press release:

“For incarcerated persons, books are windows into different worlds. For those formerly incarcerated, libraries are doors of opportunity,” said ALA Senior Director of Public Policy and Government Relations Alan Inouye. “Libraries not only provide books and internet connected devices, they offer staff to help reentering patrons use the technology and navigate the network of resources and information to help them get their bearing in a world vastly different than the one they came from.”

The full press release is available here.

For the full report, please see