Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Age Verification topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers push age‑verification bill to restrict juvenile access to online pornography; legal questions raised
Summary
Republican leaders described a revived age‑verification bill aimed at preventing minors from accessing pornographic websites; supporters argued it targets a predatory industry and cited legal precedent, while Democrats raised First Amendment and data‑security concerns.
Republican lawmakers said they are taking another run at an age‑verification bill intended to prevent juveniles from accessing pornographic websites. A sponsor described the measure as aimed at keeping harmful material away from young children and said the effort follows a previous clause that passed the House last year but stalled in the Senate and a summer study.
Representative Scott Odenbach, House majority leader, said proponents see the bill as focused on protecting minors, not regulating consenting adults. "If you're gonna provide harmful material to juveniles, you need to age verify to make sure that you're not providing it to young people," Odenbach said, and he cited work with stakeholders and the attorney general about the state's ability to defend such a law if challenged.
Supporters pointed to similar legislation in other states and to pending litigation over a Texas law now before the U.S. Supreme Court. Several supporters referenced the Miller v. California obscenity test as part of the legal framework they believe supports state regulation of obscene material.
Democratic caucus leader Rep. Erin Healy said she and her colleagues oppose the measure as written because it broadly affects adults' First Amendment rights and requires consumers to submit information that could be exposed in data breaches. "I in no way support children watching pornographic material," Healy said, "but I voted no because this directly impacts adults' First Amendment rights by having to enter in so much information about yourself in order to access a website." She added that the bill leaves cultural and enforcement problems unaddressed and that there may be better approaches to protect children online.
Legal context and uncertainty: Sponsors said they had consulted stakeholders and the attorney general; they noted pending Supreme Court consideration of a similar Texas law. Opponents flagged the risk of litigation and data‑security concerns if verification requires collecting personal information.
Next steps: Supporters said they plan to move the measure through committee again this year and that the statute history and pending national litigation will shape the state's approach. Opponents said they will press for revisions that limit data collection and preserve constitutionally protected speech.
