An Elbert County school district has dismissed its challenge to a judge’s injunction ordering it to return banned books to library shelves, days before the Denver-based federal appeals court was set to hear oral arguments this week.

Although a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit formally dismissed the case in a Jan. 21 order, the judges indicated their frustration with the last-minute development.

“This appeal has been set for oral argument for more than two months, since November 3, 2025. Since that time, the court has expended valuable time and resources studying the briefing and record in this matter, and otherwise preparing for oral argument. In that regard, Appellant’s filing of the Motion only days before the scheduled argument is not well-taken,” wrote Judges Gregory A. Phillips, Carolyn B. McHugh and Richard E.N. Federico.

In addition to the parties to the appeal, one dozen outside organizations and two dozen First Amendment scholars submitted briefs analyzing the constitutional arguments in the case.

In December 2024, the parents of two district students, the local NAACP chapter and The Authors Guild — representing authors of the removed books — sued the district, alleging a violation of the First Amendment and its counterpart provision of the Colorado Constitution. The district made a total of 19 books unavailable in schools, with parents noting their objections to “evil trans ideology,” offensive content “for most religious people,” and the “depravity of Islam,” among other themes.

U.S. District Court Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney found the elected school board had likely violated the First Amendment rights of students and authors by removing books based on political ideology.

“Plaintiffs have shown that the District removed the 19 books based on the authors’ and books’ content and viewpoints on issues such as race, sexual orientation, gender identity, LGBTQ content, and to promote the Board’s self-proclaimed ‘conservative values,'” wrote Sweeney, Colorado’s first openly gay federal judge.

The 10th Circuit initially declined to suspend, or stay, her injunction while the district appealed. Although the district argued to the 10th Circuit that Sweeney had inserted herself as the “de-facto library czar,” the appeals court did not believe the district was entitled to relief. The district subsequently returned the books to its shelves.

The motion for dismissal submitted to the 10th Circuit indicated that the district would pay the plaintiffs’ appellate costs.

Elizabeth School District told Colorado Politics its decision was motivated by the ongoing discovery of evidence in the trial court while the appeal was pending.

“Based on the timing and the progress of proceedings in the district court, the school district decided its limited resources were best directed at preparing for trial and any appeal after a final decision from the trial court,” the district said in a statement.

“Far from seeking to conserve its allegedly limited resources,” responded Tim Macdonald of the ACLU of Colorado, representing the plaintiffs, “ESD spent those resources on a wasteful appeal and then sought retreat when it was time to face the court. We hope that the district will learn from its mistakes, agree to stop banning books and return to the important job of teaching kids to read.”

The case is Crookshanks et al. v. Elizabeth School District.

Editor’s note: This article has been updated with statements from both sides.