LEGISLATION

With the 2011 legislative session over, Media Coalition has archived here all of the bills it tracked in that period, with bill summaries and notes included. Media Coalition watched these bills closely but did not oppose them in memos because they were adequately amended, were not problematic to begin with, or were never assigned to a committee or brought up for a vote.

Most Recent News: Iowa S.F. 410 died before the end of the legislative session.

History: Iowa Senate File 410 would have required public libraries to adopt policies limiting access to electronic media, videos, or video games by minors under seventeen years of age if the material had been given an "R," "NC-17" or "comparable rating" by the Motion Picture Association of America, the "film advisory board," or the Entertainment Software Ratings Board. Media Coalition opposed the opposition; a letter written to Iowa senators on March 25 argued that the proposal was likely unconstitutional because government bodies cannot enforce voluntary industry rating systems without violating the First Amendment.

Section 16 of Massachusetts Senate Bill 636 would require the video game, software development, and television industries to post labels on their content declaring that it includes violent themes. The proposal then requires adults to bar minors in their care from accessing or viewing such content. In effect, the labels stand in for parental judgment and adult guidance even though parents and guardians may disagree about what content is appropriate for the minors for whom they care.

Most recent news: Media Coalition sent a memo in opposition to Section 16 of S.B. 636 on May 16. The memo argues not only that the bill is unconstitutional as compelled speech but also because the government cannot dictate to parents what media their children access. Moreover, the bill relies on the assumption that violent content in media leads to violent acts in the real world - a claim that is not backed up by scientific literature.

House Bill 195 would criminalize the intentional or knowing Internet dissemination to anyone under 16 years of age any communication that is "harmful to minors" if the sender has knowledge of the character of the communication and believes that a person under the age of 16 will receive it.

Most Recent News: H.B. 195 died on the House calendar on March 24. Media Coalition sent a memo in opposition to the legislation on March 14.

Most Recent News: A provision in New Hampshire S.B. 175 would expressly exempt video games from the bill's definition of "expressive works." Media Coalition on November 2 sent to the New Hampshire Senate Commerce Committee a letter outlining the reasons that S.B. 175 should not explicitly state that video games are not "expressive works," excluding them from a section that would exempt them from the bill's provisions. 

Alaska House Bill 172 and Senate Bill 27 are companion bills that would have narrowed Alaska's existing harmful to minors law (currently enjoined as a result of a court challenge initiated by Media Coalition) as it applies to the Internet. The languague addressing the problems that prompted Media Coalition to challenge the law have now been removed from the legislation.

Most Recent News: H.B. 127 passed the House Judiciary Committee on March 11 with the section that applies the state's harmful to minors law to the Internet removed. On March 3, Media Coalition sent a memo to House Judiciary Chair Carl Gatto and Vice-Chair Steve Thompson addressing its members' concerns about section 9, which would have narrowed the harmful to minors law passed in 2010 to criminalize only the distribution of harmful to minors material by an adult if the recipient is under 16 years of age and the adult is reckless regarding the recipients' age or if the adult believes the recipient is younger than 16. The legislation would also have added a knowledge requirement as to the content being sent to a the minor. Because this language was later removed by the Judiciary Committee, the court challenge to the existing law will continue.

Arkansas Senate Bill 668 and Senate Bill 741 would apply the state's harmful to minors law to material distributed generally on the Internet.

Most Recent News: S.B. 668 was ultimately pulled prior to its hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Media Coalition on March 15 sent a memo in opposition to S.B. 668 and S.B. 741 to Arkanasas' Senate Judiciary Committee. S.B. 741 was not called at the Judiciary Committee hearing for which it was scheduled, and no further action is pending with little time left in Arkansas' legislative session.

Hawaii House Bill 548 and Senate Bill 1207 are companion bills that would hold publishers and authors of visitor guides and websites that "invite, attract, or encourage" readers to trespass on private property civilly liable if a reader does trespass and suffers injury or death by doing so.

Most Recent News: H.B 548 died in committee in early April. Hawaii has a two-year legislative session, so while the bill failed to pass this year, it could come back next year.

Hawaii Senate Bill 1234 and House Bill 1007 are companion bills that would to apply the state's "pornographic for minors" statute to electronic communications.

Most Recent News: On March 15, Media Coalition sent a memo in opposition to H.B. 1007 prior to its hearing in the Public Safety, Government Operations, and Military Affairs Committee and Committee on Economic Development and Technology.

H.B. 1007 was heard by the House Judiciary Committee on February 22. Media Coalition sent the committee a memo in opposition to the bill on February 20. On February 9, Media Coalition sent to the Senate Economic Development and Public Safety, Government Operations, and Military Affairs Committees a memo in opposition to S.B. 1234.

All the bills Media Coalition tracked in 2010 are available here.

Alaska Governor Sean Parnell signed S.B. 222 into law on May 14, 2010. Members of Media Coalition are currently challenging S.B. 222 as an unconstitutionally overbroad restriction on speech in U.S. District Court. Click here to learn more about the case, ABFFE v. Burns (Previously ABFFE v. Sullivan).

Read our memo in opposition to this bill, sent to the House Judiciary Committee on June 15.

Media Coalition sent a letter in opposition on April 19, and the Louisiana legislature later amended and passed an unproblematic cyber-bullying bill.

Massachusetts Governor Duval Patrick signed S.B. 997 into law on April 12. Members of Media Coalition are currently challenging the law, which went into effect in July, in U.S. District Court. Read more about the case, ABFFE v. Coakley, here.

Rhode Island S.B. 2156 would have criminalized the sale or rental of video games rated "M" (for Mature) to anyone under 17 and "AO"-rated (Adults Only) games to anyone under 18 years of age. The bill would also have made it illegal for a sales clerk to sell or rent violent or sexually explicit games to anyone under 18; the bill's provisions would also extend to Internet transactions.

Most recent news: A Senate Committee recommended that the bill be held for further study on March 16, 2010.

On February 23, 2010, Media Coalition submitted a comment in response to a Notice of Inquiry issued by the Federal Communications Commission, entitled "Empowering Parents and Protecting Children in an Evolving Media Landscape." Replies to submitted comments were filed by a March 26, 2010 deadline.

California A.B. 847 would have defined a business as an "adult entertainment venue" if 50 percent of gross revenue is derived from "adult material" or, if the business allows private or public viewing of such content, the threshold is lowered to 20 percent. The revenue percentage typically required to meet the definition of an "adult entertainment venue" is 20 percent.

Media Coalition's memo in opposition is available at the above link.

Louisiana S.B. 152 would have allowed anyone to file a complaint with the attorney general's office claiming that a retailer had distributed to a minor material that depicts "sexually explicit conduct." The attorney general's office would then be required to send a certified letter to the retailer with a warning that if the retailer distributes such material to a minor a fifth time, the retailer may be sued by the attorney general. After the fifth alleged instance, the attorney general could investigate the retailer and ultimately bring a lawsuit seeking monetary damages, injunctive relief, or both. The bill also provides a cause of action that allows an individual to sue a retailer by alleging five instances of the retailer distributing sexual content to a minor if the retailer had previoulsy received a warning letter from the attorney general. The individual can seek actual damages and legal fees.

Most recent news: Media Coalition's letter in opposition to the bill, sent in mid-2009, is linked above.

New York A.B. 1782 would have barred the display, dissemination, or advertisement of any material that exploits, is devoted to, or is principally made up of descriptions or depictions of illicit sex or sexual immorality; is lewd, lascivious, or indecent; or consists of nude or partially nude figures posed or presented in a way that would provoke or arouse lust or passion or that would exploit sex, lust, or perversion for commercial gain.

Most recent news: Media Coalition sent New York Assembly members a memo in opposition to the bill, which did not pass in the 2009 legislative session.

IL HB 4078 Memo in Opposition

Most Recent News: Media Coalition sent to Nebraska's legislature a memo asserting that the definitions of "sexually oriented business" and "sexually oriented material" put forward in L.B. 443 are so broad that they could apply to many mainstream book, music, and video stores that sell mainstream films, books, or albums that feature descriptions of nudity or sex that could be considered inappropriate for some minors. Many stores would self-censor to avoid the negative connotations associated with "sexually oriented businesses." Retailers who did not do so would likely lose customers unwilling to shop at a "sexually oriented business." 

History: NB L.B. 443 would have imposed a tax on businesses deemed "sexually oriented." Any retailer devoting as little as 10% of its space to "sexually oriented materials" is defined as a "sexually oriented business." Sexually oriented material is defined as any verbal or visual depiction of nudity or sexual activity that is patently offensive to the average adult with respect to what is suitable for a minior. Businesses deemed "sexually oriented" would not be allowed to operate between 11 p.m. and 8 a.m., and new "sexually oriented businesses" would face restrictions on their locations.

Nebraska L.B. 97 proposed a ban on any material in which a person who appears to be a minor engages in sexually explicit conduct. Media Coalition wrote a memo in opposition to the bill on April 23, 2009.

Most recent news: Media Coalition sent to the New Jersey Assembly a memo in opposition to A.B. 3757, arguing that the bill restricted speech that falls outside of the historical categories of unprotected speech as determined by the Supreme Court and unduly burdened social networking sites.

History: New Jersey A.B. 3757 would bar the dissemination of "sexually offensive communication" to a person who is reasonably believed to be under 13 or between 13 and 16 but four years younger than the speaker via a "social networking website." The bill would also require social networking sites to revoke access to "sexually offensive" speakers or to set up an elaborate complaints elaborate process.

Tennessee Senate Bill 1235 and House Bill 810 are companion bills that would have imposed a tax on material deemed harmful to minors. Media Coalition wrote a memo in opposition to the proposal on April 23.

Tennessee S.B. 1236 and H.B. 809 were companion bills that would have imposed a tax on sexually-oriented material.

Utah H.B. 353 would have amended the state's Truth in Advertising law to make it a deceptive trade practice for a retailer to advertise adherence to a rating system and then fail to adhere to the rating system. Media Coalition sent several memos in opposition to the bill.

Most recent news: In mid-May of 2009, the legislature adjourned without overiding the governor's veto of the bill, defeating H.B. 353.

Washington House Bill 2103 would have imposed a tax on material with sexual content. Media Coalition wrote a memo to legislators to express its concern about the bill in April of 2009.

Alabama H.B. 153 would have imposed a 30% tax on all "sexually oriented materials" that are "sexually oriented in nature" and any material that is legally obscene for adults. Media Coalition members were concerned that the bill's definition of "Adult Novelty Items" could apply to books, magazines, movies, and other content that is sexually oriented but First Amendment-protected. Additionally, Media Coalition noted Supreme Court rulings that bar government from imposing taxes on speech based on its contents.

Arizona House Bill 2660 would have created a civil cause of action against producers and distributors of "dangerous" material, defined as material that is found to produce or incite a felony, if the producer or distributor knew or should have known that the material woulld result in a person committing a felony and the material was a cause in committing the felony.

History: Media Coalition submitted a memo in opposition to H.B. 2660 warning legislators of the chilling effect third party liability imposes on speech. The bill did not become law.

Colorado Senate Bill 125 would have created a "harmful to minors" law for Colorado. Had S.B. 125 passed, it would have barred the dissemination to minors of material that is illegal for them under the Ginsberg v. New York decision. The law would also have placed restrictions on the ways in which libraries and retailers could display "harmful" works, including on the Internet.

History: Media Coalition sent to lawmakers a memo in opposition to S.B. 125, asserting that the legislation would severely limit adults' and older minors' access to material that they have a First Amendment right to browse, borrow, or buy. The letter also notes the reasons for which the Colorado Supreme Court found the state's previous harmful to minors law unconstitutional in the 1985 Media Coalition case Tattered Cover v. Tooley.

Under Connecticut Raised Bill 363, a person would commit the crime of using an "interactive computer service" to display obscenity to a minor if that person used an "interactive computer service" to disseminate to a minor material that is harmful to minors. The law left uncertain the question of whether the definition of "interactive computer service" applied to material on the general Internet.

History: Media Coalition sent to Joint Committee on the Judiciary Chairmen Sen. Andrew McDonald and Rep. Michael Lawlor a memo in opposition to the bill pointing out its constitutional infirmities and the questions it left open. The bill did not pass in 2008. 

Indiana H.B. 1042 would require retailers to register with and inform the Secretary of State of their intent to sell any material containing "sexually explicit" content before being allowed to do so. The definition of "sexually explicit" is not limited to obscenity.

Media Coalition successfully challenged the law in Big Hat Books v. Prosecutors. Prior to the bill's passage, it sent a memo in opposition to the legislation to all Indiana House members.

MA HB 1423 memo in opposition

NY AB 11717 memo in opposition

NY AB 11717 Veto Letter to Governor

SC Proviso on Printed Matter Letter in Opposition

Legislative History: In June of 2007, the Oregon legislature passed House Bill 2843, which includes two statutes aimed at curbing minors' free speech rights. The bill criminalizes the dissemination to minors of non-obscene, sexually explicit material and does not require that those materials meet the Miller/Ginsburg obscenity standard established by the Supreme Court.

Media Coalition sent to Oregon legislators a memo in opposition to the bill as well as a veto request to the governor after the bill's passage. 

Court Challenge: Members of Media Coalition, local bookstores, the ACLU of Oregon and others challenged the statutes, which were declared unconstitutionally overbroad by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2010. To learn more about the case, visit Media Coalition's Powell's Books, Inc. v. Kroger page.

Alabama H.B. 441 would have barred the sale, rental, or other dissemination to a minor of any "sexually explicit" or "violent" videogame.

Media Coalition's memo in opposition is available at the link above.

History: Utah House Bill 260 requires, among other provisions, that the Attorney General's office create and maintain an "Adult Content Registry" of all Internet content believed to contain material that is harmful to minors. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) would have to block access to those sites by blocking their IP addresses or providing filtering software at consumers' request. If a content provider opts out of the Adult Content Registry or fails to determine the proper age of a minor visiting its unrated website, it would be considered to have distributed material harmful to minors. Media Coalition sent Governor Huntsman a letter urging him to veto the bill after both chambers of the legislature approved it.

Court Challenge: The governor signed H.B. 260 into law in late March, and Media Coalition members joined local bookstores, the ACLU of Oregon, and others in a legal challenge to the new law. For more information about that challenge, Florence v. Shurtleff (originally The King's English v. Shurtleff), see Media Coalition's case page.

Alabama's House of Representatives proposed House Bill 441, intended to ban the sale, rental, or other form of dissemination to minors of "sexually explicit" and "violent" video games. Media Coalition sent a letter opposing the bill and explaining its constitutional defects. H.B. 441 failed to pass into law.

Media Coalition filed a comment with the Federal Communications Commission in response to its Notice of Inquiry on the matter of violent television programming and its impact on children.  In the comment, the Media Coalition stated why federal restrictions on violent content on broadcast, cable, and satellite television would violate the First Amendment and provided research questioning the purported link between violence in the media and real-life instances of violence.  

S. B. 900 would have required any business that takes an order for material harmful to minors by mail, telephone, facsimile or the Internet and delivers the material by private delivery service to take “reasonable measures” to determine that the person placing the order is an adult.

Media Coalition's memo in opposition to the bill is available at the link above.

H.B. 2468 would have imposed a civil fine on any owner, agent or employee who sold, rented or allowed admission to a viewing of a movie rated "R" or "NC-17" by anyone under 17. H.B. 2468 would also have imposed a civil fine on any owner, agent or employee who sold or rented a sound recording with a parental advisory sticker to anyone under 17.

Media Coalition's memo in opposition to the bill is viewable by clicking on the link above.

Early in 1997, the Arizona legislature introduced a bill to ban the rental or display to minors of CD-ROM or video games with violent content. The bill was amended by the Senate Family Services Committee and later sent to the Senate Rules Committee. Media Coalition on February 27 sent a memo in opposition to Committee Chair Sen. Carol Springer expressing its members' concern about the bill. The Arizona legislature did not pass the bill.

On July 16, 1996, Media Coalition wrote to New York Governor George Pataki to request his veto of Senate Bill 210E. SB 210E would have extended the state's harmful to minors law to computer networks. The memo explains that the bill was unconstitutional and would not have accomplished legislators' goal of protecting minors.

Alaska S.B. 31 would have criminalized the display of "harmful to minors" material in any place to which minors have access.

Media Coalition's memo in opposition is available at the link.

Alaska S.B. 31 would have criminalized the display of non-obscene sexually explicit media in places where minors might conceivably see it and forced retailers of First Amendment-protected material to place such media, deemed "harmful to minors," in sealed opaque wrappers. The bill was not passed into law.

Media Coalition sent a letter to Senator and Judiciary Committee Chairperson Robin L. Taylor outlining the constitutional problems within Alaska Senate Bill 31 on February 3.