Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Library Explicit Material topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates library bill over 'explicit material' language, seeks clarifications for state library and colleges
Summary
Committee discussion on a bill about explicit material in public libraries focused on whether the language would affect private bookstores, the state library and state‑funded institutions; members asked the sponsor and staff to resolve statutory cross‑references and exemptions before voting.
The Judiciary Committee discussed a bill proposing restrictions and enforcement provisions for explicit material in public‑library children’s collections. Committee members raised concerns about scope, statutory cross‑references and whether the language would unintentionally apply to private bookstores or state‑funded institutions.
Several members noted that similar language and the Miller test already appear in statute (a committee member read from the statute): “subsection 2 says a public library may not maintain in its children's collection inventory books that contain explicit material,” Reagan (staff member) read aloud and noted subsection 3 outlines necessary policies. Committee members asked whether the sponsor’s amendment would make private bookstores subject to the public‑library restrictions; members who had previously reviewed comparable bills said the intent was not to affect private businesses, but they wanted the record to be clear.
Testimony and written comments were cited: supporters such as Sarah Barron, Jonathan Alm and Scott Bernstein were listed as in favor in the committee packet; Michael Olsen from Protection and Advocacy was recorded as opposing portions of the bill, particularly proposed changes on page 8 involving ward labeling and the use of the term “individual under guardianship.” University and state‑library representatives raised concerns about a technology exemption and asked that the state library and state‑funded institutions of higher education be explicitly exempted from portions of the bill; committee staff pointed to statutory cross‑references (for example, the Miller test at 12.1‑27.1‑03.5 and a public‑library definition linked to 40‑38) and said the sponsor had prepared language exempting the state library under specific subsections.
The sponsor and committee agreed to follow up. Senator Cory volunteered to run a suggested change by the prime sponsor and to check with stakeholders about the higher‑education and state‑library language. The committee did not take a final vote and recessed to continue work the next morning.
