The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), and the National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) have sent a letter to the Fort Worth Police Department demanding the release of Sally Mann photographs confiscated from the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth’s Diaries of Home exhibition.
The wall at center had previously displayed four photographs by Sally Mann. “Popsicle Drips,” along with other images depicting nude children, has been removed and the remaining works have been rehung to fill the space.
Earlier this year, five photographs by Sally Mann were removed from the exhibition as part of an investigation into the artworks, which depict Ms. Mann’s children in the nude. According to The Dallas Express, a formerly Black-owned progressive newspaper that is now part of a network of news entities with ties to founders of the Tea Party political movement, the pieces were “secured as potential evidence.”
Days after the artworks were removed, the NCAC released a statement calling into question Tarrant County Judge Tim O’Hare’s decision to file a criminal complaint about the works. The letter noted, “Government officials have a duty to respect and uphold the First Amendment — which includes robust protection for artistic expression.”
The ten-page letter, signed by the three organizations and directed to Chief Neil Noakes, argues that the photographs do not meet the legal definition of obscenity, do not constitute child pornography or abuse, and ultimately, the seizure of the works violates the First Amendment.
In part, the letter states:
“While police generally may seize evidence of alleged crimes pursuant to a warrant issued by a magistrate upon a finding of probable cause, it requires additional procedural safeguards when ‘materials presumptively protected by the First Amendment are involved.’ Authorities may not seize such materials to ‘block their distribution or exhibition’ without a prior judicial determination of their illegality in an adversarial proceeding. This mitigates the ‘risk of prior restraint,’ the ‘most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights.’ A prior adversarial hearing may be unnecessary when police seize a single copy of a book, film, or other expressive work ‘for the bona fide purpose of preserving it as evidence in a criminal proceeding.’ But even then, affected parties must thereafter have a prompt opportunity to challenge the seizure’s constitutionality in an adversarial proceeding and to retrieve or copy the material for continued display pending the proceeding’s conclusion.”
The organizations go on to state directly that the seizure was “a deliberate effort to prevent display of the photos, despite the absence of any judicial determination of their legality in an adversarial proceeding.” The works were confirmed to be removed from the exhibition on Tuesday, January 7. Diaries of Home was on view at the museum from November 17, 2024, through February 2, 2025.
In a press release, Adriana Piñon, legal director of the ACLU of Texas, stated, “It’s shameful that government officials would use the criminal legal process to censor art and expression. This is a clear violation of the First Amendment and of the guardrails against abuse of the criminal justice system. Artistic expression should not be subject to the whim and punishment of government officials’ personal taste.”
Aaron Terr, Director of Public Advocacy at FIRE, added, “Anyone who’s ever taken a photo of their child or grandchild taking a bath understands that not all photographs of child nudity are malicious, let alone child abuse. The seizure of Mann’s works is an egregious abuse of power that dishonestly conflates artistic expression with sexual exploitation.”
Elizabeth Larison, Director of NCAC’s Arts and Culture Advocacy Program, commented, “Publicity stunts like this one — in which artworks that have been shown and discussed for over 30 years are suddenly the focus of an unfounded ‘investigation’ — do nothing to protect victims of child abuse, and serve only to chill the creative expressions of artists and cultural institutions by subjecting them to the threat of political prosecution and the unconstitutional seizure of artwork.”
