Schools often abuse their power to choose exactly what students can be exposed to. Districts often remove materials that may be racist or prejudicial from their classrooms to protect students from unfavorable moments in history. This is one of the largest forms of censorship in schools today. Already today schools tend to censor most of what happens in the daily school environment with respect to what can be said, talked about or expressed. In the case of Monteiro v. Tempe Union High School, Monteiro presented the issue that The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and “A Rose for Emily,” both of which required curriculum work, created racism and harassment in the school environment. Eliminating literature from the school curriculum would only deprive students of the past and history, which is essential. Furthermore, if such literature is criticized as discriminatory, all books containing discriminatory content against any race or group should be removed. On the other hand, if such works were not excluded from the curriculum, this could pose the risk of creating a hostile environment. Although parental concerns about literature containing racism, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and “A Rose for Emily,” allow students to express their beliefs and ideals about discrimination because educational literature has not been censored from the school curriculum. Monteiro states that Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and William Faulkner's “A Rose for Emily” contain “repeated use of the profane, offensive, and racially derogatory term 'nigger'” are questioned for their “credibility” in the classroom (Reinhardt 2). Both works express the racism and discrimination of the past and capture very important moments the...... middle of paper ......, as well as other works within the school curriculum, can be considered offensive to due to their racist content and profane characters. However, literature is exposed to students to educate them about the nation's past and history, in the hope that students will become more knowledgeable and be able to formulate ideals about discrimination and inequality. Trying to remove the two cited books would also require the removal of all prejudicial works that also have significant historical value. While there is concern that these books cause a hostile environment, as long as they are presented in a mature and responsible manner, students would be able to understand such work. The court's decision to leave literature in the school curriculum was the right decision because removing it would mean erasing knowledge of our nation's journey.