[In ruling for the plaintiffs,] [w]e would have to hold that any compliant response to an expression of political opinion critical of a school library's selection of books would violate a First Amendment right to free enquiry on the part of library patrons[.] ... When it comes to judicial supervision of school curriculums, all [precedent] point[s] in the same direction and against extending the Pico plurality's notion of non-interference with school libraries as a constitutional basis for limiting the discretion of state authorities to set curriculum.

The Armenian genocide remains a contentious issue in US politics and law. In March, the Obama administration announced its opposition to a resolution [JURIST report] labeling the World War I-era killings as genocide. The announcement came after the US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs passed the resolution [JURIST report] by a vote of 23-22. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Teyyip Erdogan condemned the resolution, and the Turkish government recalled its ambassador to the US. In 2009, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] ruled that a California state law that allows descendants of victims of the genocide to sue in state courts [JURIST report] for unpaid insurance benefits is unconstitutional. The court found that it "interfer[ed] with the national government's conduct of foreign relations" because the federal government has declined to describe the World War I-era killings of over one million Armenians by Turkish soldiers as genocide.