UTAH – Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff hopes he can keep a challenge to the state’s attempt to suppress internet pornography out of the court room. According to Shurtleff, at least 11 of the 15 plaintiffs challenging what he calls “The Truth in Porn Law” cannot prove that they have suffered significant damages, and thus have not earned their day in front of a judge.Shurtleff has asked that the case, which protests the 2005 legislative law requiring internet providers to “truthfully identify material that is harmful to minors,” be dismissed because “it doesn’t restrict anyone’s access to the internet unless they request it.”
House Bill 260 requires that filtering devices be made available by January 2006 by ISP’s in order to allow users to determine which sites they will and will not allow through to their systems. Starting on May 1, 2006, all internet content providers within the state of Utah will be required to identify adult materials using a state prepared series of regulations. The law will also require that the Attorney General’s office create a list of “adult content” sites that can specifically be blocked by those asking.
Supporters of the law say that it provides consumers with protection against offensive material due to the availability of optional filtering devices. Those that oppose the law, including the ACLU of Utah, a number of ISP’s, local artists, several bookstores, and others argue that the law is unconstitutional and could result in controversial websites being inaccurately categorized as “harmful to minors.”
The “harmful to minors” designation is a standard already used for publications, art, and film and has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court and supported by Congress when it determined that “server-based” filters are the preferred method for keeping children from accessing mature content.
