Virginia official urges appeals court to revive Net restrictions

By The Associated Press

10.30.02

Printer-friendly page

RICHMOND, Va. — A lawyer for the state has urged a federal appeals court to reinstate a Virginia law that would allow prosecution of Web site operators who knowingly allow minors access to sexually explicit material.

U.S. District Judge James H. Michael Jr. of Charlottesville last year declared the law unconstitutional. He agreed with a coalition of businesses led by Internet giant PSINet Inc., which claimed the law violated the First Amendment and the commerce clause.

State Solicitor General William Hurd told a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 28 that the state has a compelling interest in blocking children's access to harmful materials on the Internet.

"All we ask with this law is that commercial pornographers take reasonable measures to shield children from these materials," Hurd said.

For example, businesses could require Web surfers to provide a credit card number to prove they are old enough to view sexually explicit pictures or text, he said.

"This is the electronic equivalent of putting the pornographic magazine behind the counter," Hurd said.

Thomas W. Kirby, attorney for the plaintiffs, argued that the law affects more than just porn sites. For example, a clinic that provides sex counseling for physically disabled people has materials on its Web site that might be covered by the law, he said.

"That is very important information, and it's not pornography," Kirby said.

He said requiring identifying information like a credit card number could discourage privacy-minded people from getting the help they need.

PSINet and the other businesses, including the publisher of Penthouse magazine, also claimed the law unconstitutionally restricts out-of-state Web site operators. Kirby said a dozen similar state laws have been overturned in federal courts.

Judge Paul V. Niemeyer grilled Kirby on what, if anything, his clients believe can be done to achieve the state's interest in protecting children.

"Have we abandoned our ability to do that just because we have an Internet? We have a need for segregating information so adults can see it and children can't," he said.

Kirby said there are less restrictive and more effective ways for the state to accomplish its goal, including educating parents to closely monitor their children's computer use or install Internet filters. Niemeyer responded that children have access to the Internet in many places outside the home.

The court usually takes a few months to rule.

Previous

Virginia law restricting Internet material ruled unconstitutional
Federal judge says statute intended to protect children from harmful material isn’t specific enough to protect adults’ rights.  10.15.01

Related

Arts group challenges S.C. Internet law
2001 measure makes it a crime to post photographs, other material state considers unsuitable for children.  11.25.02