And most of the controversy involves school libraries - although there are some exceptions.
This bill just doesn’t do much. I’m not opposed to it. I guess it might do a little good.
But it’s posturing by politicians.
This is splitting hairs: removing books from school libraries is a de facto ban on those books. Neither the article nor law implies that "book ban" in this context means anything other than "school book ban."
No, it isn't. You're trivialising actual book bans by referring to public education literature selection as a "ban".
Lots of books aren't in the school library; doesn't mean that they're banned - you can still buy them and read them to your kids, take them out of public libraries, read them on the internet ... all without any legal or unofficial consequences.
Removing these books from school libraries is done with the understanding that the students won't otherwise be able to access them, i.e. they can't get to a bookstore or public library without their parent and their parent will also refuse to keep it at home. That is a de facto ban.
Now: you might happen to think that it's good that these books can't be accessed, which is something that can (and is) being discussed. But I don't think it's worth mincing words over what's happening, especially given that it's a standard (and non-partisan) use of the phrase "book ban" in the US.