A Florida activist donated and then challenged his own satirical “Trump Bible,” probing whether authors can file removal objections under state school-book rules.
A satirical “Bible” donation has landed in Florida school districts and sparked a legal fight over a question few expected: can an author challenge his own work.
South Florida activist Chaz Stevens says he is using Florida’s school-material objection process to pressure districts—and possibly courts—into confronting a gap he believes exists in state law.. This week. Stevens distributed a digital chapbook he co-wrote. “The Trump Bible: History of the World Part I — The King Don Version. ” and then filed formal objections aimed at removing it.
The campaign is notable not just for its subject matter, but for its method.. Stevens distributed one licensed e-book copy per enrolled student statewide. then submitted identical formal challenges across all 67 school districts under Florida Statute 1006.28—the statute that governs how residents can object to learning resources.. His stated goal is to exploit what he calls an unresolved issue in the wake of 2024 changes to the law.
Those 2024 amendments. passed after years of broad book challenges. limited challengers who do not have children in a given district to one challenge per month.. DeSantis’ office. according to Stevens. explicitly cited him as a reason for the shift. describing amendments meant to curb “prolific” challengers.. Stevens now argues the 2024 fix went only so far: lawmakers tightened who can file and how often. but did not clearly address whether authors have standing to object to the availability of their own work.
To make that argument concrete, Stevens is turning the spotlight back on himself.. He frames the maneuver as an attempt to force consistency in how districts apply the state’s review standards.. In earlier years. he filed challenges involving other materials—including the traditional Bible and certain reference books—contending that the content contained passages and themes that should trigger removal or restriction.. Those objections were not successful, and he is now asking whether his satirical “other Bible” will receive different treatment.
Stevens’ “Trump Bible” is intentionally confrontational.. The chapbook pairs biblical passages with episodes tied to President Donald Trump and surrounding public figures. structuring each of its seven chapters around references that Stevens says are designed to be read as parody.. Among the names he invokes are Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen, E.. Jean Carroll, Ivanka Trump, and Stephen Miller, along with a reference to Jeffrey Epstein.
He also ties the project to a moment he describes as politically and culturally inflammatory: when Trump shared an AI-generated image portraying himself in a Christ-like pose. Stevens says backlash followed and the post was eventually deleted.. That reaction. Stevens said. helped inspire him to create a satirical chapbook—then donate it to schools as a test case.
The legal question at the center of the challenge could shape more than just one district’s book review.. Stevens’ filing points to passages he argues meet the same scrutiny thresholds that have driven other book reviews in recent years. including sexually explicit satire. crude humor. and references he says involve minors. drug use. and sexual content.. The examples Stevens highlights include a fictional “advertisement” for a drink with a provocative name and references to minors and drugs; a parody he describes as adapting a biblical rape story into a transactional scenario; and a crude comedic scene he says is adapted from “History of the World. Part I.”
For districts. the immediate issue is compliance with the state process and the internal standards they use to decide whether challenged materials can be made available.. At least one district has already responded.. Lee County school officials told Stevens in an April 20 email that the book was not yet in circulation and would undergo review by a certified media specialist before being made available to students. in line with district policy and state law.
From Stevens, the response was defiant and dismissive.. He sent a note thanking the district for “taking our kids to the next level. ” while also calling the book “horrible” and arguing it should be banned.. His tone mirrors the broader campaign strategy: to use the review process itself as a stage—provoking districts into articulating their rules and possibly forcing a clearer legal answer.
Beyond the author-standing dispute. Stevens says he wants to make a larger warning about how controversial content is flagged in school settings.. He argues that AI tools could soon be used at scale to identify “objectionable” material without sufficient context. and he points to an example from the United Kingdom where AI-assisted review reportedly led to the removal of hundreds of books from a library.
Whether or not AI becomes decisive. the practical risk he’s flagging is familiar to parents and educators: shortcuts can turn messy cultural arguments into simplistic labeling.. For students and families. the question isn’t just whether a particular book is allowed—it’s whether the process is transparent. consistent. and responsive to nuance rather than algorithms.
Stevens’ timeline suggests he’s aiming for maximum attention.. He plans to release the full seven-chapter work on June 14, Trump’s birthday.. Two days earlier. he says he will install a display inside the Wisconsin State Capitol rotunda under a government permit—a nod to his earlier “Festivus” protest in Florida—framing the book and the installation as two halves of the same birthday provocation.