Idaho’s abortion gag law imposes a regime of censorship. Now artwork is being removed | Opinion

The rising wave of censorship in Idaho has now removed items from an art exhibition, as The Guardian reported Tuesday. Lewis-Clark State College is hosting an exhibition of artworks on health care issues. But artworks dealing with the subject of abortion were removed for fear they would violate the state’s abortion gag rule, contained in the 2021 No Public Funds for Abortion Act.

The artworks you cannot see were in no way graphic or obscene. They did not even encourage women to seek abortions. They simply acknowledged the existence of abortion.

But Idaho’s laws are so vague and poorly written that the college can’t be sure that a touring art installation wouldn’t violate them. So six pieces of art were removed from the show. The ACLU and the National Coalition Against Censorship have written to the college, urging it to reconsider its decision.

It’s understandable that the college would be afraid. Idaho’s abortion gag rule treats “promoting abortion” — a vague, undefined category — as a misuse of public funds. At a minimum, that could mean college officers who exhibited the works potentially face a year in jail and a $1,000 fine. If more than $300 were spent on the art show, it’s conceivable they could face 14 years in prison.

The point of imposing penalties like that on speech is to impose fear. And the point of fear is to impose silence. If it’s unclear whether an installation of stories from women who have had an abortion is forbidden or not, better not to risk it.

And there’s another thing that’s spreading such fear: an increasing knowledge that the Idaho Legislature will try to hurt you if you make it mad. That its Republican majority is often vengeful, and that it treats neither the Idaho nor U.S. Constitution — nor even supposed beliefs about the proper role of government — as a serious constraint upon it.

The same year the Legislature passed the No Public Funds for Abortion Act, they cut universities’ budgets in retaliation for teaching things that some in the Republican majority did not like.

An art show that discusses abortion, among other health care topics? Don’t do it, they might chop your budget. Imagine what might happen if a political scientist publishes work on the rise of far-right political extremism in Idaho.

This is the message Idaho’s public universities have already received, and we can see it in their actions.

And so a regime of censorship has been achieved — not one that is theoretical, but one that has already been in effect for years.

The safest path is clear:

• Don’t talk about slavery.
• Don’t talk about the people who were killed to make room for colonization.
• Don’t talk about abuses of police authority.
• Don’t talk about the 144 years for which women were denied the vote.
• Don’t talk about abortion.

There is no similar regime of censorship on the other side. Professor Scott Yenor of Boise State University has said vile things about women repeatedly, things so offensive they enraged most people. He has not lost his job.

And there was never any worry that Boise State University’s budget would be cut because Yenor worked there.

Lawmakers of good faith need to reckon seriously with what has happened. You are the proprietors of a regime of censorship. Whether you helped build it or not, it is your job to tear it down.

And Idaho’s universities should put up stiffer resistance. Universities are supposed to be havens for free intellectual inquiry. That requires fighting back on efforts to restrict that freedom.

“Every person may freely speak, write and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty,” reads the Idaho Constitution.

And if some lawmakers won’t heed those words on their own, it’s time for a court to remind them.