Library Libel: The Fight To Convince a Court That “Groomer” Is Defamatory

From the primordial ooze of 4chan emerged the phrase “Ok groomer.” An anti-LGBTQ+ spin on “Ok Boomer” popularized by the alt-right, the slur is a common culture war epithet. In recent years, Amanda Jones, a Louisiana librarian who advocated to keep LGBTQ+ books on her shelves, found herself in the “groomer” crosshairs. The result? A First Amendment smackdown between Jones and Dan Kleinman, a self-styled “library watchdog” who keeps public libraries from becoming “[awashed] in porn.”

“That Librarian”

Jones became a target after she spoke up in a public Livingston Parish Library Board of Control meeting back in July 2022. The Board had been debating whether to keep certain books, many of which had LGBTQ+ themes, in their libraries. Jones advocated against such a policy, arguing that censoring the books would be “extremely harmful to our most vulnerable–– our children.” The horde swooped down. Kleinman accused Jones of being a groomer and trying to make pornography available to kids. In her complaint, Jones says that Kleinman has also targeted her repeatedly on social media, appeared on a Louisiana talk radio to talk about her, and contacted her employer at least twice. Among his posts about her:

“Ah, Amanda Jones. She needs to be in prison for what she’s doing to kids.”

“School librarians trains [sic] students to use @Grindr to meet men for a night.”

“school #librarians like #ThatLibrarian Amanda Jones @abmack33 are the main source of obscenity for kids”

“Actual gr—mer of children, Louisiana school #librarian Amanda Jones, rarely opens her @abmack33 account, but it’s open now + she’s slamming #lalege #lagov essentially for protecting citizens from gr—mers like her. And her gr—ming is truth, not defamation”

As a response, Jones hit Kleinman with a lawsuit for defamation and false light invasion of privacy.

Books vs Bloggers: The Prequel

Jones had previously filed a similar lawsuit against Michael Lunsford and Ryan Thames, who were present at the same meeting in July. Lunsford’s group said Jones was advocating to keep “sexually erotic” and “pornographic” books in the kids sections. Thames accused Jones of advocating to teach “anal sex to 11-year-olds.” In January of 2022, the District Court found that there was no defamation on the grounds that the bloggers’ comments were opinions. A divided Appeals Court then denied Jones’s appeal on a technicality, only for the Louisiana Supreme Court to revive the case. While the court did not take up the substantive merits of the case, Justice Jefferson Hughes offered the following commentary via a concurring opinion: 

If plaintiff did not do these acts, she cannot prove a negative. The burden will be on defendants to prove that plaintiff did in fact do the acts they have publicly accused her of. If defendants can prove that plaintiff did the things they claim, then the truth is a defense. If they cannot, they have defamed the plaintiff.

While that’s not the correct standard (it is always the plaintiff’s burden to prove falsity), it effectively tees up the central challenge for both cases: separating fact from opinion. 

Potential Defenses?

What exactly defines a “groomer?” Kleinman and the others can argue that grooming merely means exposing children to books that they believe are inappropriate or dangerous. Jones, on the other hand, argues that “groomer” has long been understood to refer to someone “who cultivates a sexual relationship with a child” and that “porn” has a common-sense meaning. Similarly, Jones can argue that Kleinman has suggested Jones is guilty of actual sexual abuse. On X, Kleinman reshared a Newsweek article titled “Surgical Castration for Child Sex Offenders Takes Effect in Louisiana, ” adding: “FYI Amanda Jones @abmack33 #ThatLibrarian.” 

Even if Jones’s tormentors sincerely believe that allowing kids to read books with LGBTQ+ characters sexualizes them or makes them vulnerable to predation, they better have the facts underlying their accusations in order. For example, Jones’s Complaint states that Kleinman falsely accused her of making Spanking for Lovers, The Ultimate Guide to Kink, and The Ultimate Guide to Threesomes, available to children. [Editor’s Note: SLANDERTOWN is working on getting affiliate links operational for these lovely books]

A win for Jones could potentially have implications for countless other librarians, educators, and authors who are on the front lines of the censorship debate. The chronically online may recognize epithets like “groomer” as rhetorical hyperbole, but it’s important to show one’s work when deploying the term in an ostensibly factual context. Otherwise, one risks being schooled by a librarian.