A federal judge has ruled that a group of bestselling authors can continue their lawsuit aimed at overturning Utah’s book ban law, which has put some of their books out of reach of public school students.

U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby on Tuesday determined the authors had legal standing to sue, denying parts of the state’s motion to dismiss the case. The order effectively clears a path for the lawsuit to move forward.

The lawsuit, filed in Utah District Court in January, alleges the state’s sweeping school book bans violate the First Amendment and cause the plaintiff authors “personal” and “professional” harm.

In Utah, a book must be removed from all public schools if at least three school districts (or at least two districts and five charter schools) determine it amounts to “objective sensitive material” that meets state definitions for pornographic or otherwise indecent content.

So far, 37 titles have been banned from schools statewide under the 2024 law.

Among the plaintiffs are award-winning novelists Elana K. Arnold and Ellen Hopkins. Together, their books make up seven of those 37 titles.

Kurt Vonnegut, LLC, represented by the late author’s four children, is also a plaintiff in the lawsuit. The Caged Bird Legacy, an entity run by the late poet Maya Angelou’s family to oversee her literary works, joined as a plaintiff in February.

Neither of those deceased authors are represented on the state’s book ban list. Angelou’s memoir “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings” has been removed from shelves in the Davis and Granite school districts. The Washington County School District removed Vonnegut’s anti-war novel “Slaughterhouse-Five” in 2023, declaring it “pornographic.”

Two unidentified Utah high schoolers also are listed as plaintiffs in the suit.

“The book ban has damaged the Plaintiff Authors financially, reputationally, and professionally,” Shelby wrote in his ruling. “This is sufficient to establish standing.”

Tuesday’s ruling doesn’t mean the authors and students have proved their cases, but it means they are a step closer to a chance to argue the law is unconstitutional.

Defendants include the Utah State Board of Education and its 15 individual members; Utah Attorney General Derek Brown; and the Salt Lake City, Davis and Washington County school districts, along with each district’s superintendent in their individual capacities.

The judge granted the state one part of their dismissal motion: He agreed the relief claims against the individuals are redundant because they duplicate what their entities would have to pay if the defendants lose the case.

However, other claims made by the state in an attempt to disprove the authors’ legal standing were denied.

The state argued the plaintiffs lacked a “constitutional right to have books purchased and stored in public libraries.” They also claimed that library inventory is not government speech that can be challenged under the First Amendment.

The judge determined that both arguments addressed the “merits of the complaint” but did not sufficiently address their standing.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Utah is representing the students and authors in the lawsuit, which demands that the state revise portions of its sensitive materials law, calling it “modern-day book burning.”

“Getting past a motion to dismiss is a meaningful moment in a civil rights case,” ACLU of Utah’s legal director Jason Groth wrote in a news release Wednesday. “It allows us to now address the weighty constitutional issues at stake.”