Rooney’s UK Books Vanish as Stars Rally Against Anti-Terror Law

Key points

• Faber & Faber announced on October 14 that it would stop supplying Rooney’s books in the UK to avoid legal liability for passing royalties to a proscribed organization.
• Sales of Rooney’s titles surged 291% in the week following the announcement, with independent bookshops reporting immediate sell-outs and an inability to reorder stock.
• An open letter signed by Paul Mescal, Daisy Edgar-Jones, Jessie Buckley, and numerous authors declared that Rooney is a writer, not a terrorist, and called the withdrawal an affront to free speech.
• Rooney stated she could no longer safely travel to the UK without facing arrest, sending her editor to collect awards on her behalf.
• Irish bookshops have seen a tenfold increase in sales, with 95% of the new demand coming from British buyers seeking to circumvent the UK supply chain.

Background

This controversy follows the UK proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organization in July 2025. Rooney had previously stated her intention to donate book royalties to the group, a stance she reaffirmed in August 2025, accepting the legal consequences under the Terrorism Act. The current situation builds on earlier tensions regarding the group’s status, which saw a high court ruling in February 2025 that was overturned by the Court of Appeal in June, keeping the ban in force. The Supreme Court is set to hear a related case in two weeks.

How outlets are covering it

Variety highlights the cultural backlash, noting that high-profile figures like Mescal and Edgar-Jones, who rose to fame through Rooney’s 'Normal People' adaptation, are leading the protest. The Guardian emphasizes the practical impact on readers and booksellers, detailing the 'eerie' disappearance of stock and the rise of informal cross-border smuggling from Ireland. The Atlantic offers a more critical view of Rooney’s stance, arguing that while the suppression of speech is problematic, Rooney is an Irish citizen challenging foreign law, and the publisher’s decision was a legal necessity rather than a direct ban. The outlets differ on whether the situation constitutes censorship or a lawful response to terrorism financing, with The Guardian and Variety framing it as an attack on free expression, while The Atlantic notes the legal complexities of the Terrorism Act.

Why it matters

The case sets a precedent for how anti-terrorism legislation intersects with artistic expression and publishing. It highlights the tension between national security laws and free speech, potentially affecting other authors and artists who support proscribed groups. The immediate scarcity of Rooney’s books in the UK underscores the chilling effect such laws can have on the availability of literature, raising questions about the boundaries of censorship in democratic societies.

What to watch

The Supreme Court is expected to hear a case regarding the Palestine Action ban in two weeks, which could impact the legal framework surrounding the situation. Independent booksellers are exploring alternative supply chains, including sourcing from Ireland and Northern Ireland, to keep Rooney’s works available. The next major test will be the release of Rooney’s future novels, which may face similar distribution challenges if the legal status of Palestine Action remains unchanged.