Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Protection Indecency Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee introduces draft requiring venues to limit children's access to 'indecent' exhibitions
Summary
The House State Affairs Committee voted to introduce RS32021C1, a draft legislative bill that would impose a duty of care on hosts and organizers to take reasonable steps to restrict children's access to indecent exhibitions; sponsors said the draft aims to be a time, place and manner regulation and not an outright ban.
Blaine Kinzotti, president of the Idaho Family Policy Center, asked the committee to introduce RS32021C1, saying the draft creates "a duty of care for facilities, for hosts, and organizers of indecent ****** exhibitions to take reasonable steps to restrict children's access to indecent ****** exhibitions." He emphasized the draft does not ban such exhibitions outright.
"Instead, it functions as a constitutionally permissible time, place, and manner regulation, protecting children while still allowing adults to attend indecent ****** exhibitions if they choose," Kinzotti said, arguing the draft mirrors the FCC's longstanding indecency standard for daytime broadcasts and is content-neutral.
Committee members pressed staff and sponsors on details. Representative Mickelson said much of the draft reads as background and asked why court cases and findings were embedded in the proposed code rather than a more direct statutory definition. A staff speaker said legislative findings were included to explain the legal basis and to show why the measure would be defensible under existing case law.
Representatives asked about affirmative defenses and operational burden on hosts. Committee counsel pointed to a provision that provides an affirmative defense if a host can produce a "legally enforceable contract" with performers or organizers stipulating that the performance will not violate the statute, and said plaintiffs would still bear the burden to prove a host failed to take "reasonable steps." Sponsors repeatedly described "reasonable steps" as measures such as checking IDs at the door.
Representative Scott moved to introduce RS32021C1; the committee approved the motion. Several members said they wanted to strengthen the affirmative-defense language and review First Amendment implications before a full hearing.
Next steps: the draft was introduced for further committee consideration; sponsors signaled they expect additional debate on scope, wording of affirmative defenses and constitutional defenses before a public hearing and possible bill introduction.
