Utah State Rep Unveils Bill To Force Porn To Come With A Warning Label
from the for-the-children dept
We have talked in the past about the state of Utah's strange and ongoing war on pornography. The output of this war being waged from the most conservative members of a conservative state government thus far has been attempts to have pornography declared a state emergency, to have a "porn czar" position put in place, and to outright block pornography on smart phones. And now, yet another lawmaker, this time Rep. Brady Brammer, has unveiled a bill that would require pornography to carry a warning label or message warning about the harm to minors that view porn.
The label about the potential harm to minors would have to appear on both print and digital material that appears in Utah if the bill proposed by Republican Rep. Brady Brammer passes the Legislature.
If the label doesn't appear, the producer could be sued for $2,500 per violation, either by the Utah Attorney General's Office or a private group. The enforcement process would be similar to warning labels about toxic substances that are required in California, Brammer said Tuesday.
There are a couple of problems with this analogy and, therefore, the proposed bill. See, toxic substances are not speech and pornography, whatever you think of it, very much is. To force someone engaged in speech to include government-mandated speech practically screams "1st Amendment violation." Brammer has tried to suggest otherwise, stating that it's not censorship because no speech or content is being prevented from publishing. Sadly for him, that isn't the only manner by which you can violate the First Amendment. Forcing speech upon citizens is a violation as well.
But, hey, there's more. Perhaps you're wondering what definition Brammer's bill came up with for what constitutes pornography and what doesn't, given how tortured a legal question that has been since pretty much forever. Brammer ingeniously sidesteps that question by pushing that determination to the post-accusation cycle.
The bill doesn't contain a specific definition of pornography. Instead, that would be decided in court if a lawsuit is filed under the law, Brammer said.
That sure sounds like a recipe for a hellish court schedule, as purveyors of content will have no idea whether their content qualifies as porn, while the law will be administered by a notoriously prudish state government. Mike Stabile, who works for the porn industry trade group Free Speech Coalition, nails the potential for chaos here rather well.
"You can't force someone to say something," he said, pointing to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning a California law that would have required anti-abortion pregnancy crisis centers to post signs saying they are not medical facilities. Warning systems like those for rating movies with an R or PG-13 are different because they are voluntary, he said.
Meanwhile, the Utah bill is broad enough that it could cover everything from the TV show "Game of Thrones" to a partially nude selfie on Twitter, he argued.
It sure would be nice if Utah's state government could trust adults to make adult decisions and parents to be parents. Certainly that would be a better use of time than banging their legislative heads against the First Amendment over and over again.
Filed Under: 1st amendment, brady brammer, free speech, porn, porn label, utah
