Newly-elected Utah governor Jon Huntsman is pondering whether to sign a new bill requiring Internet service providers, e-mail services, and even search engines to block Internet sites considered to be porn sites.
The state Senate approved the bill March 2. Among other provisions, it would also create an official Website list singling out sites offering publicly available material deemed harmful to minors, and would lay felony charges on Utah ISPs who don’t offer customers ways to block or disable access to those sites.
It also requires content providers to rate material deemed harmful to minors as adult-only material or face third-degree felony charges.
Huntsman’s office told reporters the governor’s aides would meet to review the final version of the bill, with Huntsman having until March 22 to sign or veto the bill.
Supporters have said the measure would give parents more control over Internet surfing in their homes, but opponents have said the bill could be used to cover Internet cafes and wireless Internet providers, as well as face constitutional challenges because the actual language of the bill is considered vague.
"I'd be shocked if the governor did not sign this bill," said NetCoalition federal policy director Markham Erickson to reporters. "But I'm quite certain there will be a constitutional challenge." His groups’ membership includes two of the Internet’s prime search engines, Google and Yahoo.
Huntsman could also sign the bill knowing it would provoke a constitutional challenge. A federal court struck down a similar Pennsylvania law in 2004. That law—aimed primarily at stopping child porn—let the state impose criminal charges on ISPs, but the law didn’t survive a court challenge that argued the law ended up blocking sites that had no child or adult porn.
"There is little evidence that the act has reduced the production of child pornography or the child sexual abuse associated with its creation," wrote U.S. District Judge Jan DuBois in September."On the other hand, there is an abundance of evidence that implementation of the Act has resulted in massive suppression of speech protected by the First Amendment."
