Harford County board votes to appeal state’s reversal of book removal

The Harford County Board of Education voted 5–2 on Nov. 13, 2025 to authorize an appeal to the Harford County Circuit Court of a State Board of Education decision that reversed the county board’s earlier action removing the book Flamer from some school library shelves.

The vote came at a virtual special meeting called to consider whether to seek judicial review of the State Board’s opinion. Legal counsel Greg explained two paths: request reconsideration from the State Board, or file a petition for judicial review in the Harford County Circuit Court. "You would ask them to reconsider...and then there's further appeal to the circuit court," Greg said, adding that the county would face a high burden to show the State Board’s decision was "arbitrary or unreasonable." He estimated the chances of success on appeal at "less than 20 percent."

Board members were sharply divided. Vice President Lauren Page framed the choice as one about local authority and precedent: "The State Board stepped in and overrode our decision locally," she said, arguing that letting the decision stand would set a "dangerous precedent" for local elected control. Melissa moved to appeal the State Board decision to circuit court; Lauren seconded the motion.

Other members urged caution. Board member Trey, who was a preferential voter at the meeting, argued the dispute had grown costly and distracting and emphasized the book's potential value to some students: "The true message of this book is one of hope and resilience," he said, and added that the title was not in the curriculum and could be restricted by parental request. Board member Mr. Korn strongly disagreed on content and age-appropriateness, saying the book was inappropriate for younger readers and that removing it was consistent with protecting children.

Counsel outlined timing and cost considerations: a reconsideration request to the State Board would likely require only a few billable hours to clarify the record, while a circuit-court petition would be more costly and rely on the existing administrative record rather than new evidence. Counsel also noted that asking the State Board to reconsider would not necessarily forfeit later court review; the timing rules can reset after a subsequent State Board action.

On a roll-call vote the motion to pursue the appeal passed 5–2, with student representatives’ preferential votes recorded but not changing the outcome. The chair announced the motion passed and adjourned the special meeting; the board’s next regular business meeting is scheduled for Nov. 17 at 6 p.m.

The decision sends the matter into the courts and continues a dispute that has included multiple appeals, procedural revisions to the district’s reconsideration process, and public debate over library selection, age appropriateness and parental rights.