Top Stories of 2003: CIPA Lives! Pro-Family Groups Celebrate Victory for Children, Families
by Chad Groening and Jody Brown
December 24, 2003
(AgapePress) - Pro-family groups are praising yesterday's Supreme Court decision to protect children from Internet pornography on federally-funded public library computers.In a 6-3 decision, the high court overturned a ruling handed down last May from the U.S. District Court of Western Pennsylvania, which declared the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) unconstitutional. CIPA requires that libraries that receive federal funds for Internet access must filter their computers.
Kelly Shackelford is chief counsel with the Liberty Legal Institute, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the Supreme Court case. He says the opposing side, led by the American Library Association (ALA) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), argued that children have a right to look at pornography.
"Their position is that if you've got a Playboy or a Penthouse [magazine] or something [like that] in your local library, your five-year-old child should have every right to see that -- and you should not be allowed to stop them," Shackelford says.
He says it is "laughable" that the ALA and ACLU put forth the argument that in writing the First Amendment, the nation's founders meant that people had a right to get pornography at taxpayer expense.
Shackelford says the testimony that went into passing CIPA was very compelling. He explains that testimony included people who were unable to get time on library computers for research purposes because the units were in use by others who were accessing pornography.
He adds that librarians and children were subjected to pornographic images when they were simply walking by a computer, and cites cases in which men who had viewed online porn assaulted children in library restrooms.
The attorney says that is why he is very pleased with Monday's Supreme Court decision.
No Porn on Shelves
One of the pro-family groups that lobbied Congress to pass and impose a filtering law on public libraries was the American Family Association. Tim Wildmon, president of AFA, told the Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal that the decision makes sense, noting that libraries have the option of determining what magazines they place on their shelves.
"I don't know of any public libraries that order Hustler and put it on the shelves for children to read," Wildom said. "In the same way, given the prevalence of porn on the Internet, libraries need this kind of tool for protection. They do have the option to disengage the filter if someone wants it disengaged."
In fact, two of the justices in the majority said the government's interest in protecting children from pornography on library computers outweighed the burden that would be placed on users who would have to ask library staff to turn off filters.
Judith Krug of the American Library Association predicts that many libraries will simply turn down federal funds instead of installing filters. She also says she expects those that do install filters to tell library patrons just how easy it is to turn off the filters.
Pat Trueman, former director of the American Family Association's office in Washington, D.C., fought for CIPA for well over a year. Trueman, a Virginia attorney, says the bill originally was designed to prohibit pornography only when children were using library computers -- but that AFA sought "significant changes" in the bill when it was being considered.
Trueman says he met with the chief sponsor of the bill, Mississippi Congressman Chip Pickering, to request that it be expanded to also prohibit adults from accessing hard-core and child porn. That change, he says, was opposed not just by liberals in both houses of Congress, but also by some in the pro-family movement who were fearful that a more expansive bill might be struck down by the Supreme Court.
Libraries Not 'Peep Shows'
In general, pro-family groups across the nation are applauding the Supreme Court's decision on CIPA. One of those, the National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families, says the law is in the best interests of families and communities as a whole.
"The majority of community libraries have all the computers in one place, with no side panels to block the view of what a user is accessing," says Jack Samad, senior vice president of the Coalition. "Consequently, children who are using computers have an unfettered look at the pornography that some adults or even other minors are viewing."
Samad says parents should be able to take their children to the library, or drop them off, without having to worry that their kids are entering "a porn shop in disguise."
Jan LaRue, chief counsel at Concerned Women for America, says the high court rejected "the inane idea" that the First Amendment requires taxpayers to provide access to illegal pornography in a public library.
"Congress enacted [CIPA] so that federal tax dollars wouldn't be used to turn libraries into dirty peep shows open to kids," LaRue says. She adds that the Supreme Court recognized in its decision that CIPA has nothing to do with censorship because no material whatsoever is removed from public access, noting that adults can request the filters be turned off and wrongly blocked sites be unblocked.
Ken Connor with the Family Research Council expresses his thankfulness that common sense prevailed. "Doubtless parents and librarians, who cannot monitor children every moment, will be grateful for the court's ruling," Connor says. "Shielding children from smut in publicly funded libraries is a no-brainer."
And the director of the Virginia-based Family Foundation says CIPA simply protects children from the "insidious impact" of pornography while they use library computers. Victoria Cobb says it seems "very reasonable" that with federal funds comes some responsibility toward the community and children.
"Libraries should be havens of learning and safety -- not of pornographers and predators," Cobb says.
