Banned Book Summer Reading List

CSES Staff • June 21, 2022


All American Boys (2015) by Jason Reynolds and Brendan Kiely is a Young Adult (YA) novel about two high school students, Rashad, who is Black, and Quinn, who is White. Rashad is wrongfully accused of shoplifting potato chips and attacking a woman. A White police officer immediately takes Rashad out to the sidewalk and beats the boy without any questioning. Bleeding internally, Rashad goes by ambulance to the hospital.

 

Quinn witnesses the beating and quickly leaves the scene. He is torn by witnessing a violent injustice and knowing the offending police officer. This officer has mentored Quinn since his father died in Afghanistan. A video of the beating goes viral and divides the students in the school.

 

Quinn attends a protest with Rashad’s family and others. At the police station, the demonstrators lie on the ground in a “die in.” Rashad and Quinn, together at the protest, look at each other, suggesting a good relationship in the future.

 

Objections to the book cite the portrayal of racial profiling, of police violence, and of foul language.

 

 

All Boys Aren’t Blue (2020) is a YA memoir about growing up Black and queer. In it, LGBTQ+ activist George M. Johnson writes about being bullied, deals with issues of consent, agency, and sexual abuse, and depicts a sexual encounter and statutory rape. Johnson says young people need stories of their lived experiences and identity struggles.

 

In 2021, All Boys Aren’t Blue was named to the Teen Top 10 Titles by the Young Adult Library Services Association; the list is a “teen choice” list. This book is also No. 3 on the American Library Association’s Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2021. The book has been removed from schools in at least 15 states because of its LGBTQ+ themes and profanity, and because it is considered sexually explicit.

 

 

Between the World and Me (2015) by Ta-Nehisi Coates is a semi-autobiographical letter to his teenage son about the realities of being Black in the United States. He looks at American history through the lens of how racist violence and White supremacy are woven into the social fabric of the United States. His book was inspired by James Baldwin’s 1963 epistolary novel, The Fire Next Time. The title is from a poem by Richard Wright. The author shows no optimism with regard the overcoming White supremacy.

 

This book won the National Book Award in 2015, and it remained at the top of the New York Times bestseller list for nonfiction for three weeks that year. Many colleges and universities have it as their common reading for first-year students. After complaints, however, some local school districts have nixed it for classroom instruction as being racist and anti-police.

 

 

Gender Queer (2019) by Maia Kobabe is a graphic memoir about coming of age and exploring gender identity. Kobabe passes through stages of anxiety and confusion while trying to establish an identity. At one point, Kobabe writes, “I don’t want to be a girl. I don’t want to be a boy, either. I just want to be myself.”

 

Critics label the book unsuitable for young people because it depicts a man touching a youth’s penis as well as oral sex and masturbation. A South Carolina governor called the memoir “sexually explicit” and “pornographic.” A Virginia judge ruled that parental permission must be granted before students may read the book. The ALA labeled it the most challenged book of 2021. School libraries in Florida, North Carolina, and New York have removed the book from circulation.

 

 

Heather Has Two Mommies (1989), by Lesléa Newman, is an early children’s book about life with lesbian parents. The ALA ranked it the ninth most frequently challenged book in the U.S. in the 1990s. It was criticized by people opposed to same-sex marriage and by some LGBTQ+ individuals who thought the portrayal wasn’t acceptable. However, the book also received high praise for highlighting lesbian parents.

 

Heather’s parents are her biological mother, who gave birth after artificial insemination, and her biological mother’s same-sex partner. At playgroup, Heather is upset when she finds out that many of the other children have a daddy and she does not. One child has two daddies. The caretaker of the playgroup makes sure the children understand that all families are special and no family type is better than any of the others. By the end of the book, Heather is no longer sad and she expresses gratitude for her mothers.

 

One complaint was that when Heather cries because she has no daddy instead of wondering why she has two mommies, it suggests that there’s a problem with having two mommies. Another criticism is that the queer relationship wasn’t realistic. Another criticism was about including artificial insemination. The author deleted this part in later editions because of objections that it was not child-friendly, but aimed at adults.

 

The book received high praise and, in time, publishers became more accepting of queer children’s literature. Heather was a trailblazer. Newman recently wrote: “But LGBT kids are still getting teased, beat up, and even murdered. If you think things have really changed, walk into a high school boys’ locker room. Books are a way to educate people and help the world become a better place. Progress is not as fast as we’d like it to be, but we’re moving in the right direction. It’s a new era, a new day for Heather, and a new day for the world.” The book has remained in print and at its 25th anniversary, Newman prepared an updated edition. The book is again challenged 33 years after its first publication.

 

 

Lawn Boy (2018) by Jonathan Evison is the story of Mike Muñoz, a 22-year-old Chicano in Washington State. Mike is struggling to find his way as those who propose to help him in employment take advantage of him. Mike is a creative and talented landscape architect, though he has had no formal training. He seems to be a natural artist and also dreams of writing a novel, but he constantly runs into the excesses of an out-of-control capitalism. The novel is narrated in the first person by Mike and has become controversial largely because of a scene of sexual exploration between Mike and another boy, when they were in the fourth grade.

 

The controversy began when a woman at a Leander, Texas, school board meeting complained that the novel was full of profanity and pedophilia. After her strenuous objections spread on the internet, school systems around the country removed it from their school libraries. Although there is no pedophilia, there is a significant amount of profanity, which may make the book inappropriate for elementary school libraries. Toward the end of the novel, Mike recognizes that he is, in fact, gay, after he establishes a relationship with a new friend. That process of self-discovery is beautifully handled by the author. The novel offers a strong critique of racism and classism in the United States, but without preaching, and demonstrates the importance of diligence, hard work, and following your dreams in the face of adversity.

 

 

Maus by Art Spiegelman is the only graphic novel to win a Pulitzer prize (Special Award in Letters), in 1992. Published chapter-by-chapter in the underground comic magazine Raw from 1980-91, Maus portrays Spiegelman’s interviews with his father about being imprisoned in the Auschwitz concentration camp during World War II. The subtitle, “A Survivor Bleeds History,” indicates the intensity of the father’s story of life as a Jew in Nazi Germany.

 

Spiegelman’s characters are anthropomorphized animals — Jews are mice, Germans cats, Poles pigs, Americans dogs, and so forth. While this is an obvious imitation of the Walt Disney style of comic storytelling, on a deeper level it comments on the Nazis’ genocidal tendency to see other ethnic groups as non-humans.

 

The author plays with this in various ways as the story progresses, with Jews wearing pig masks as disguises, and Nazis using guard dogs in the prison camp. Maus is widely recognized as one of the most important examples of the graphic novel, as well as a significant work of Holocaust literature.

 

Scholars have criticized the book on various grounds, including the author’s generally unsympathetic portrayal of his father, and the danger of reinforcing stereotypes by showing humans as animals. But Maus drew another kind of criticism in 2022, when the trustees of McMinn County schools in Tennessee decided to ban the book on grounds of profanity, violence, and nudity. In response, the book has found unprecedented attention, topping bestseller lists at Amazon and Barnes & Noble as readers decided to see for themselves what the book had to say — and to support the author.

 

 

Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (2012) by Jesse Andrews. Greg Gaines is just trying to make it through his senior year of high school inconspicuously when he is forced to deal with his friend Rachel’s cancer and impending death. With bluntness and humor, the New York Times bestseller describes a situation — and reactions and emotions — that young people may have to confront.

 

This book ranks seventh on the ALA’s Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2021 mainly because of complaints about vulgar and offensive language and content. The author tweeted in response: “It’s a potty-mouthed book about how hard it is to process pain and grief, and how hard it is to grow up. The idea that this harms anyone is beyond stupid. That is how a lot of teenagers talk.”


 

Melissa (2020) is the story of a transgender girl in fourth grade who was called George by everyone until she found a way to reveal that she knew she was a girl. When her teacher announces that their class play will be Charlotte’s Web, Melissa wants to play the role of Charlotte. When her teacher says she can’t try out for the part of the female spider because she’s a boy, Melissa—with help from her best friend—comes up with a plan to play Charlotte and to let everyone know who she is, once and for all.

 

Under the original title George, this was the most banned, challenged, and restricted book in the U.S. in 2020. The author, Alex Gino, realized that not recognizing Melissa’s real sense of herself by titling the book George gave the message that it was OK to use an old name for a person when they have chosen a name that works better for them, so he asked everyone to cross out the title of the book and write “Melissa’s Story” instead. The book was republished as Melissa in 2022.

 

The novel deals with gender identity, but with no sexual activity. Melissa’s older brother thinks she is a gay boy, but she says she doesn’t “know who she liked, really, boys or girls.” Her brother also mentions looking at porn and “dirty” magazines as something boys do. Some parents object to the book because of these comments. It is clear that many parents are uneasy with sexual topics and think that children should not read this book until they are in seventh grade. However, children tend to recommend it for 9-year-olds.

 

The book won prestigious awards as well as high praise from major reviewers, and is an appropriate book for adults and children to read.

 


 Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You (2020) by Ibram X. Kendi and Jason Reynolds is a non-fiction book for ages 12 and up. Based on Kendi’s National Book Award-winning Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America (2016), this remix/sequel has been re-written in a more conversational style and considerably shortened. The complex language and ideas have been adapted for a younger audience by the popular children’s book author Jason Reynolds.

 

Both the original book and the teen version have been criticized for “selective story-telling” and for not presenting a fuller, more complex history of racism and inequality. Also, some public statements by Kendi have been criticized as divisive. It has been defended and praised as a powerful book that helps young people and adults understand past and present racism in America. It has been included in — and objected to — in the curriculum of numerous school districts.

 

 

The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison. Published in 1970, Morrison’s first novel is about growing up Black in the 1940s in a predominantly White community in Ohio. We follow Pecola Breedlove as she faces persistent racism from the townspeople and sexual abuse by her alcoholic father beginning at 9 years old. Pecola develops a severe inferiority complex after being criticized as “ugly” because of her dark skin. The title reflects her desire for the blue eyes she associates with Whites. Ultimately, Pecola’s trauma leads to a mental breakdown, reflected in the novel’s increasingly chaotic narrative structure.

 

In 1970, the New York Times praised Morrison’s novel for its break with the predominant culture and its broad emotional range, though some readers were put off by its deliberately simple style and challenging subject matter. Morrison’s selection for the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1993 established her status as one of America’s leading authors, and her debut novel is a landmark in her career.

 

Even so, The Bluest Eye has come under fire for its inclusion of “sexually explicit material,” “disturbing language,” and what some apparently perceive as “an underlying socialist communist agenda.” On these grounds, a number of school districts have tried to remove it from their curricula and libraries. The ALA has included it on its list of “most challenged books” since the 1990s. From 2010 to 2019, it was the 10th most frequently banned, according to the ALA.

 

 

The Hate U Give (2017) by New York Times best-selling author Angie Thomas tells the story of a 16-year-old African American girl, Starr Carter, who lives in a poor neighborhood but is a student at a posh and snooty prep school in a wealthy neighborhood. One day after a party, Starr is the main witness to the killing of her best friend by a police officer. As the murder makes national headlines, Starr’s world is turned upside down and she’s harassed and threatened.

 

This YA novel has been challenged as having excessive profanity and an anti-police theme. Dealing with race relations and police brutality, the novel has been defended for balancing Whites, Blacks, and police officers as both good and bad. It has won numerous awards, including two Goodreads Choice Awards.

 


Common Sense for the Eastern Shore

By John Christie February 17, 2026
These are the words from Emma Lazarus’ famous 1883 sonnet “The New Colossus” inscribed on a bronze plaque on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. In 1990, Congress reaffirmed this vision of America by establishing the Temporary Protected Status program. TPS is designed to provide humanitarian relief to foreign nationals in the United States who come from disaster-stricken countries. In its present form, the TPS legislation gives the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security responsibility for the program. However, the legislation prescribes the kind of country conditions severe enough to warrant a designation under the statute, the specific time frame for any such designation, and the process for periodic review of a TPS designation which could culminate in termination or extension. All initial TPS designations last from six to eighteen months. Before the expiration of a designation, the statute mandates that the Secretary shall review the conditions in the foreign state to decide if the conditions for the designation continue to be met, following consultation with appropriate agencies of the government. Extension is the default; the designation “shall be extended” unless the secretary affirmatively determines that conditions are “no longer met.” ------------------------------------------------------------- A massive earthquake devastated Haiti in January 2010, and precipitated an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. Shortly after, then-DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, after consultation with the State Department, designated Haiti for TPS due to “extraordinary conditions.” Haitian nationals in the United States continuously as of January 12, 2010, could thus apply for TPS, and obtained the right to remain and work in the U.S. while Haiti maintained its TPS designation. Napolitano set the initial TPS designation for 18 months. As Haiti’s deterioration worsened, successive DHS secretaries have extended this program. Gang violence and kidnappings have spiked. In 2021, a group of assailants killed Haiti’s then-President Jovenel Moìˆse. In 2023, another catastrophic earthquake hit Haiti. In 2024, in response to these conditions, then-DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas once again extended and redesignated Haiti for TPS, this time effective through February 3, 2026. During the 2024 election cycle, the GOP candidate, Donald Trump clearly indicated that time had not tempered his views on Haiti, characterized by him as a “shithole country” during his first term. He stated that when elected, he would “absolutely revoke” Haiti’s TPS designation and send “them back to their country.” On December 1, 2025, Kristi Noem, DHS secretary in the second Trump administration, announced, “I just met with the president. I am recommending a full travel ban on every damn country that’s been flooding our nation with killers, leeches, and entitlement junkies. Our forefathers built this nation on blood, sweat, and the unyielding love of freedom, not for foreign invaders to slaughter our heroes, suck dry our hard-earned tax dollars, or snatch the benefits owned to Americans. We don’t want them, not one.” So says the official responsible for overseeing the TPS program. And one of those (her word) “damn” countries is Haiti. Three days before making the above post, Secretary Noem announced she would terminate Haiti’s TPS designation as of February 3, 2026. Five Haitian TPS holders filed suit in federal court in Washington initially seeking an injunction against the termination of the Haitian TPS program pending the completion of the litigation. These plaintiff TPS holders are not “killers, leeches, or entitlement junkies.” They are instead a neuroscientist researching Alzheimer’s disease, a software engineer at a national bank, a laboratory assistant in a toxicology department, a college economics major, and a full-time registered nurse. The case was assigned to district court judge Ana Reyes who granted the plaintiffs’ injunction request on February 2, 2026, by way of an 83-page opinion. The plaintiffs charge that Secretary Noem preordained her termination decision because of hostility to non-white immigrants. According to Judge Reyes, “This seems substantially likely. Secretary Noem has terminated every TPS country designation to have reached her desk — twelve countries up, twelve countries down.” Judge Reyes also decided that Noem’s conclusion that Haiti (a majority non-white country) faces only “merely concerning” conditions cannot be squared with the “perfect storm” of “suffering and staggering” humanitarian toll described in page after page of the record in the case. In Judge Reyes’ view, Noem also ignored Congress’s requirement that she review the conditions in Haiti “after consulting with appropriate agencies.” Indeed, the record indicates she did not consult other agencies at all. Her “national interest” analysis focuses on Haitians outside the United States or here illegally, ignoring that Haitian TPS holders already live here and legally so. And though Noem states that the analysis must include “economic considerations,” Judge Reyes concluded Noem ignored altogether the billions that Haitian TPS holders contribute to the economy. The administration’s primary response in the litigation has been to assert that the TPS statute gives Secretary Noem “unbounded” discretion to make whatever determination she wants, any way she wants. Yes, Judge Reyes acknowledges, the statute does grant Noem some discretion. But, in Judge Reyes’ opinion, “not unbounded discretion.” To the contrary, Congress passed the TPS statute to standardize the then ad hoc temporary protection system; in Judge Reyes’ words, "to replace executive whim with statutory predictability.” The administration also argued that the harms to Haitian TPS holders were “speculative” if they are forced to return to Haiti. Because the State Department presently warns, “Do not travel to Haiti for any reason,” the administration asserts that harm is “speculative” only because DHS “might not” remove them. However, according to Judge Reyes, this argument fails to take Secretary Noem at her word: “We don’t want them. Not one.” The public interest also favors the injunction, in the opinion of Judge Reyes. Secretary Noem complains of the strains that unlawful immigrants place on our immigration-enforcement system. Noem’s answer is to turn 352,959 lawful TPS Haitian immigrants into unlawful immigrants overnight. Noem complains of strains to our economy; her answer is to turn employed lawful immigrants who contribute billions in taxes into the legally unemployable. Noem complains of strains to our health care system. Noem’s answer is to turn the insured into the uninsured. “This approach is many things – but the public interest is not one of them,” according to Judge Reyes. The opinion of Judge Reyes concludes: “Kristi Noem has a First Amendment right to call immigrants killers, leeches, entitlement junkies, and any other inapt name she wants. Secretary Noem, however, is constrained by both our Constitution and the law to apply faithfully the facts to the law in implementing the TPS program. The record to-date shows she has yet to do that. The administration has already appealed. John Christie was for many years a senior partner in a large Washington, D.C. law firm. He specialized in anti-trust litigation and developed a keen interest in the U.S. Supreme Court about which he lectures and writes.
By Office of the Governor February 16, 2026
Gov. Wes Moore signed legislation on February 17, 2026, to prohibit State and local jurisdictions from deputizing officers for federal civil immigration enforcement activity. The law, created under SB 245/HB 444 , is effective immediately. “In Maryland, we defend Constitutional rights and Constitutional policing — and we will not allow untrained, unqualified, and unaccountable ICE agents to deputize our law enforcement officers,” Moore said. “This bill draws a clear line: we will continue to work with federal partners to hold violent offenders accountable, but we refuse to blur the lines between state and federal authority in ways that undermine the trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve. Maryland is a community of immigrants, and that's one of our greatest strengths because this country is incomplete without each and every one of us.” “As an immigrant, this bill is deeply personal to me,” said Lt. Gov. Aruna Miller. “Immigrants make Maryland stronger every day, and our communities are safer when everyone feels protected and valued. This legislation ensures that our law enforcement resources remain focused on keeping Marylanders safe, not on actions that create fear in our neighborhoods. I thank the bill sponsors and Governor Moore for their leadership in ensuring Maryland remains a place where dignity and opportunity go hand in hand.” U.S. Department of Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement, also known as ICE, established its 287(g) program to authorize local law enforcement officials to perform federal civil immigration enforcement functions under ICE’s oversight. Under SB 245/HB 444, State and local jurisdictions in Maryland are prohibited from engaging in such agreements. Any local jurisdictions with standing 287(g) agreements must terminate them immediately. The legislation does not: Authorize the release of criminals Impact State policies and practices in response to immigration detainers that are issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Prevent the State or local jurisdictions from continuing to work with the federal government on shared public safety priorities, including the removal of violent criminals who pose a risk to public safety Prevent State or local jurisdictions from continuing to notify ICE about the impending release of an individual of interest from custody or from coordinating the safe transfer of custody within constitutional limits State and local law enforcement will also maintain the ability to work with the federal government on criminal investigations and joint task forces unrelated to civil immigration enforcement. Any individual who is charged with a crime is entitled to due process and, if convicted, must serve their sentence.
By Sarah Boden and Drew Hawkins, Gulf States Newsroom February 16, 2026
And now, the enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies that many Americans, including farmers, relied on to purchase health insurance are gone, having expired at the end of December.
By John Christie December 16, 2025
When I practiced law, much of my litigation involved issues arising under federal antitrust laws. The Department of Justice (DOJ) was my frequent adversary in court. In some cases, DOJ challenged a client’s conduct as anticompetitive. In others, they claimed an intended client merger would create a monopoly. Some of these DOJ court battles were won, others were not. Overall, I had great respect for DOJ lawyers. They were professional, well prepared, and dedicated to their mission of seeing justice done. They were courteous, honest, and forthright with the courts before which we argued our cases. In those days, without resorting to social media or press conferences, the DOJ spoke entirely through its court filings. Although as an advocate I took issue with various DOJ investigatory decisions as well as decisions to initiate litigation, I never thought politics was involved. Post-Watergate internal rules strictly limited communication with any figures at the White House. Not so, it seems, anymore. Beginning last January 20, all of this changed rapidly and spectacularly . On March 14, Trump triumphantly arrived at the main DOJ building in D.C. to be welcomed by a group of carefully selected VIPs. He was greeted by Pam Bondi, his chosen new attorney general, who exclaimed, “We are so proud to work at the directive (sic) of Donald Trump.” Bondi’s boast that the DOJ now worked at the president’s behest was something never said before and, in effect, surrendered the department’s long and proud independence. And Bondi’s comment was not an empty gesture. As chronicled by reporters Carol Leonnig and Aaron Davis in their new book, Injustice: How Politics and Fear Vanquished America’s Justice Department , within hours of being sworn in, Trump and his lieutenants began punishing those at the Justice Department who had investigated him or those he considered his political enemies. Career attorneys with years of experience under many administrations were fired or reassigned to lesser work, or they resigned. As Leonnig and Davis report, what followed was “the wholesale overthrow of the Justice Department as Trump insert[ed] his dutiful former defense attorneys and 2020 election deniers atop the department.” [Source: Injustice , p. xix.] In the place of years of experience, the new team appears credentialed simply by loyalty to the president’s causes. The DOJ’s conduct in court has since caused damage to judicial and public faith in the integrity and competence of the department. Just Security is an independent, non-partisan, daily digital law and policy journal housed in the Reiss Center on Law and Security at the New York University School of Law. Since January 20, it has documented federal judicial concerns about DOJ conduct. In 26 cases, judges raised questions about DOJ non-compliance with judicial orders and in more than 60 cases, judges expressed distrust of government-provided information and representations. This count was taken the day after a federal court dismissed the DOJ cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. [Source: Just Security , “The ‘Presumption of Regularity’ in Trump Administration Litigation,” Nov. 20, 2025.] As summarized by the Georgetown Law Center’s Steve Vladeck, “It’s one thing for the Department of Justice to so transparently pursue a politically motivated prosecution. But this one has been beset from the get-go with errors that remotely competent law students wouldn’t make. Indeed, it seems a virtual certainty that the Keystone Kops-like behavior of the relevant government lawyers can be traced directly to the political pressure to bring this case; there’s a reason why no prosecutors with more experience, competence, or integrity were willing to take it on.” [Source: One First , Nov. 24, 2025.] Rather than accept criticism and instead of trying to do better, Bondi’s DOJ and the Trump administration lash out in a fashion apparently aimed at demeaning the federal judiciary. At a recent Federalist Society’s National Lawyers Convention, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, one of Trump’s former defense attorneys, attributed the Trump administration’s myriad losses in the lower federal courts to “rogue activist judges.” He added, “There’s a group of judges that are repeat players, and that’s obviously not by happenstance, that’s intentional, and it’s a war, man.” Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller decries each adverse ruling against the Trump administration as just part of a broader “judicial insurrection.” Not to be left behind, Trump himself regularly complains of “radical left lunatic” judges. In addition to the harm these comments inflict on the federal courts, their premise is simply not true. According to a survey by Vladeck, as of Nov. 14, there were 204 cases in which federal district courts have ruled on requests for preliminary relief against the Trump administration. In 154 of them, district judges granted either a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or both. Those 154 rulings came from 121 district judges appointed by seven presidents (including President Trump) in 29 district courts. In the 154 cases with rulings adverse to the Trump administration, 41 were presided over by 30 Republican-appointed judges, fully half of whom were appointed by President Trump. No, it is no longer your grandfather’s Department of Justice. John Christie was for many years a senior partner in a large Washington, D.C. law firm. He specialized in anti-trust litigation and developed a keen interest in the U.S. Supreme Court about which he lectures and writes.
By CSES Staff December 16, 2025
The Salisbury City Council has appointed longtime public servant Melissa D. Holland to fill the vacancy in District 2. Holland was selected on Dec. 1 after the council reviewed several applicants. A 27-year resident of Salisbury, Holland brings more than 20 years of experience in government, education, and administration. As executive assistant to the president of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, she currently oversees operations, budgeting, communications, and planning. Before joining UMCES, Holland worked for nearly 11 years with the Wicomico County Council, gaining extensive experience in legislative procedure, constituent services, research, and budget preparation. Her background includes positions with the Wicomico County Board of Education, the State of Maryland’s Holly Center, and multiple early-learning programs. Approved by a 3-1 council vote, Holland was selected based on her administrative expertise and long-standing community involvement. (Salisbury’s City Council is now comprised of only women.) She has a bachelor’s degree in legal studies from Post University and an associate degree from Wor-Wic Community College. She has also served as PTA president at East Salisbury Elementary and Wicomico Middle School. In her application, Holland emphasized her commitment to maintaining transparency in city government and ensuring that District 2 residents remain informed and represented. “I plan to be well-informed on the issues that matter to the citizens of Salisbury and to listen to their concerns carefully,” she wrote. “I want to make a positive and lasting impact on our city.” Holland’s appointment restores the City Council to full membership as it faces debates over budgeting, infrastructure planning, and local governance initiatives. She is expected to begin constituent outreach immediately and participate fully in the selection of the next council president.
By CSES Staff November 4, 2025
Voters in Hurlock have delivered sweeping changes in this year’s municipal election, as Republican and GOP-aligned candidates won key races there. The results mark a setback for Democrats and a significant political shift in a community that has historically leaned Democratic in state and federal contests. The outcome underscores how local organizing and turnout strategies can have an outsized impact in small-town elections. Analysts also suggest that long-term party engagement in municipal contests could shape voter alignment in future county and state races. Political analysts warn that ignoring municipal elections and ceding them to the GOP could hurt the Maryland Democratic Party in statewide politics. Turnout increased by approximately 17% compared with the 2021 municipal election, reflecting heightened local interest in the mayoral and council races. Incumbent Mayor Charles Cephas, a Democrat, was soundly defeated by At-Large Councilmember Earl Murphy, who won with roughly 230 votes to Cephas’s 144. In the At-Large Council race, Jeff Smith, an independent candidate backed by local Republicans, secured a 15-point win over Cheyenne Chase. In District 2, Councilmember Bonnie Franz, a Republican, was re-elected by 40 percentage points over challenger Zia Ashraf, who previously served on the Dorchester Democratic Central Committee. The only Democrat to retain a seat on the council was David Higgins, who was unopposed. The Maryland Republican Party invested resources and campaign attention in the Hurlock race, highlighting it on statewide social media and dispatching party officials, including Maryland GOP Chair Nicole Beus Harris, to campaign. Local Democrats emphasized support for Mayor Cephas through the Dorchester County Democratic Central Committee, but the Maryland Democratic Party did not appear to participate directly.
Show More