Conflict with banning and censorship
The 1st Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The banning of books directly violates this amendment. Prohibiting the publication of a work of literature is disabling both the freedom of speech and press. Fortunately, many classic works of literature that have been challenged have been unbanned, as in most cases, judges ruled that the banning of any book is unconstitutional. "All Americans should have all sides of each issue available to them, so they can make their decisions on what is good to read. President Eisenhower believed this was man's job, not the governments. Freedom cannot exist because of legislation. Also, freedom cannot come from censorship. Freedom comes from the people" (http://www.dailycampus.com/2.7438/censorship-violates-first-amendment-1.1069585#.Um63KRDOSVo). This also means that the government shall not prohibit individuals from writing against a work of literature. The first amendment protects both sides of the continuous argument of censorship. This does not mean that those who are in favor of a piece of literature should be prohibited from having access to it.
Picture: Gaddis, Nate. "OPINION: Senator Hee Vs. the First Amendment." Photograph. BigIslandNow. Web. 5 April 2013. 30 Oct. 2013.