Arizona Law vs. Phoenix Schools: LGBTQ+ and Explicit Books on Student Shelves
Trevor Browne High School Library Shelves Books That May Conflict With Arizona Law and Parental Rights
At Trevor Browne High School (Phoenix Union High School District), parents expect age-appropriate academic reading. State 48 News was sent these pictures taken of the shelves at Trevor Browne High School Library, part of the Phoenix Union High School District. The images show rows of books labeled as “romance” — but a closer look reveals titles centered on LGBTQ+ sexual exploration, identity politics, and activist-driven nonfiction. All accessible to minors in general-interest sections and it is unclear whether sufficient parental notification was given.
Photo Credit: Anonymous Source
Books With Sexual or Explicit Content
According to our research, these novels, shelved as “romance” in student reading areas, contain graphic or explicit depictions of teen sexual activity:
Jay’s Gay Agenda (Jason June) – revolves around a gay teen’s sexual “bucket list.”
Hot Boy Summer (Joe Jiménez) – a steamy queer romance marketed to teens.
Kiss & Tell (Adib Khorram) – involves hookups and teen relationships in a boy band.
If This Gets Out (Sophie Gonzales & Cale Dietrich) – portrays a secret same-sex relationship among boy-band members.
Only on the Weekends (Dean Atta) – includes multiple romantic and sexual scenes between teenage boys.
Identity & Coming-of-Age Narratives (Non-Explicit)
These focus on self-discovery, gender identity, or coming-of-age without overt sexual content:
The Many Half-Lived Lives of Sam Sylvester (Maya MacGregor) – nonbinary teen detective story.
The Breakup Lists (Adib Khorram) – navigating emotions post-breakup between boys.
Queer Cañera (Alex Crespo) – a queer take on a quinceañera coming-of-age.
Just Your Local Bisexual Disaster (Andrea Mosqueda) – identity struggles.
The Love Interest (Helen Comerford) – spy thriller with a same-sex relationship subplot.
Activism & Ideological Nonfiction
Books encouraging advocacy or identity-focused messages include:
LGBQ Rights and the Law – an introduction to LGBTQ+ legal rights.
The Feminism Book (DK) – illustrated feminist manifesto.
Sexual Harassment: This Doesn’t Feel Right – an educational guide on harassment.
Your Turn: How to Be an Adult (Julie Lythcott-Haims) – includes themes of identity and self-expression.
Arizona law clearly restricts sexually explicit content in schools. A.R.S. § 15-120.03(C) defines “sexually explicit materials” as:
“Any description or depiction of sexual conduct, sexual excitement or ultimate sexual acts, including intercourse, sodomy, fellatio, cunnilingus or any simulation of such acts, or physical contact with a person’s clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks or breasts.”
In 2022, lawmakers passed HB 2495, which states:
“A public school may not make sexually explicit material available to students in grades kindergarten through twelve on the premises of a public school.”
The statute allows exceptions only if the material has “serious educational value” and parents provide written consent.
In 2023, the Legislature strengthened parental rights further with HB 2439, requiring transparency in library materials:
“The school district governing board shall adopt procedures that provide parents access to the school’s library catalog. At least seven school days before the start of the sixty-day public review period, the school district shall post on its website the list of books being proposed for acquisition.”
The Legal Gray Zone
The photos taken at Trevor Browne show titles like Jay’s Gay Agenda, which has been flagged in multiple states for its graphic sexual encounters, and Hot Boy Summer, marketed as a steamy teen romance. Under the plain text of HB 2495, these appear to meet the statutory definition of “sexually explicit material.”
Other works, such as El Libro de la Historia LGBT or The Feminism Book, do not depict sex but instead promote activism, identity politics, and ideological framing. While not barred under HB 2495, these fall into the scope of HB 2439, which requires parental review and catalog transparency.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor also reshaped the legal landscape. The Court held:
“Compelling children to participate in lessons or materials that directly conflict with their parents’ sincerely held religious beliefs without prior notice or opt-out provisions violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.”
Though the case addressed classroom instruction, the reasoning strengthens parental claims that libraries should not be a loophole for bypassing opt-out rights.
State Superintendent Tom Horne has consistently reinforced the primacy of parental rights:
• In June 2025, he praised the Supreme Court decision, stating that inappropriate sexual lessons are “distasteful, damaging to young children, and a distraction from academics.”
• In August 2025, he reminded families that parents have the “Constitutionally protected right to opt their children out of classes when their religious beliefs conflict with course material.”
• In April 2025, he forwarded federal guidance requiring schools to inform parents of student gender identity changes, calling nondisclosure “an outrageous abuse of a school’s authority.”
The Gray Area: Library vs. Instruction
Arizona law and case precedent are strongest when applied to classroom instruction. Parents must be notified, given opt-out rights, and provided alternative lessons. The gray area lies in school libraries: students can independently check out books, often without oversight or parental awareness.
That distinction is what makes Trevor Browne’s library shelves so controversial. If explicit material is banned by statute, does its presence in a library still violate HB 2495? If ideological books must be posted online for parent review, is Phoenix Union in compliance with HB 2439?
What Counts as “Sufficient Notice and Review”?
Arizona law requires that parents be given the chance to review classroom materials—especially when they touch sensitive topics. But here’s the question: what does that notice actually look like in practice?
When State 48 News checked the district’s online catalog, most of the flagged books were listed there, but some were missing. That raises a bigger issue: even if the catalog is complete, do parents actually know they’re supposed to search it?
For many families, unless schools directly notify them about new or controversial titles, the “notice” is buried in an online system they may not even realize exists. In other words, if the only way to review materials is by proactively searching a database that parents don’t know to check, is that really “sufficient notice and review”?
This is not about banning books. Arizona statutes already say that sexually explicit material cannot be available to minors without parental consent, and recent Supreme Court rulings give parents even broader authority. Superintendent Horne has echoed those protections, demanding academic focus over ideology.
The real issue is enforcement. The photos from Trevor Browne show that books parents might never expect — from sexually graphic YA novels to activist manifestos — are available today to minors in a Phoenix Union high school library.
For parents, the takeaway is simple: Arizona law is on your side — but it only works if it’s enforced.