all paths probably result in simply defunding though, but there is more introspective potential from pointing out the holes in the arguments for banning books with "confusing" themes
The right obviously wasn't pleased about it. But the lawsuits were made, and the courts established the precedents.
And now I don't think the left is going to be happy when they're on the receiving end, and the same courts force them to take down the rainbow flags, remove all the Kendi books, cut out the BLM activism and pride curriculums.
Because at this point, there is little difference between traditional religions and the newer "woke" ones being pushed. They've both got their dogmas, moral codes, icons, rituals, systems of punishments for heretics, etc.
And even if you don’t care about morality, but just being the majority opinion - the majority tends to swing back and forth and there are a lot of people who constantly switch sides. When you make inflammatory actions like banning the bible, or proposing to ban viagra (as some democrat did more as a symbolic gesture for banning abortion), you’re actually pushing away undecided voters and giving fuel to the “radical leftists” theory a lot of right-wingers seem to think is the entire left.
----------
For the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change.
----------
The reason these tools are used by those who use them is because they exploit existing imbalances and biases -- attempting to use the same techniques angled disfavorably against that bias will not be effective.