Well, it’s disappointing but not terribly surprising that I’ve not gotten many responses to my query about the library from the Legislators I sent emails to. I frankly don’t think they’re used to having someone ask any questions of them, but I could be wrong.
Fortunately, some have responded. Jack Driscoll of Henrietta has been quite responsive. He doesn’t believe there’s anything wrong with what Maggie Brooks wants to do, but he’s at least listening. I sent him the PDF of the relevant court decision, U.S. v. Library Association.
And Legislator O’Brien has also registered his response:
Hello, Mr. Belknap. I will confess to not having reviewed the ruling of the US Supreme Court yet, but I can share with you my own view. First, I don’t think that there is anything unconstitutional about a library opting to block pornography in a publicly funded facility so that minors can not, accidently or intentionally, gain access to the content of pornographic sites. My understanding of the Supreme Court ruling (and, candidly, I may be misinformed), is that the court determined that a library could block access to porn sites, but that sites should be unblocked when a person of legal age makes a request to view “legal” sites.
Ultimately, the question for the courts (and not for the county executive) may come down to who characterizes something as legal or not legal. And beyond that morass, there is the practical reality that content blocking filters are never going to be 100% effective even if we could ever agree on what constitutes pornography.
I am concerned that library users not be denied access to legitimate internet research. The oft repeated example seems to be the couple doing research to try and understand a wife’s struggle with a breast cancer diagnosis. There should always be a way to access sites that may provide insight to people wanting to learn. That notion, embodied in the First Amendment, is the foundation that the greatness of our nation is built upon.
Your questions are based on an assumption that the county executive’s proposal is possible (“eliminating access to adult content from computers”). I don’t think, from a practical point of view, as I have said above, that such access can ever be eliminated “on a permanent basis”. It is difficult to answer, therefore, in the format you have requested. What I can say is that I think that protecting children from pornography is a legitimate governmental objective, and I don’t think we should eliminate access to computers at libraries.
I wrote him back with more information as well.? But we’re starting to see where people are on this issue, on both the Republican and the Democratic sides of the isle.? It may never come before the Leg in the first place (I doubt it will), but it’s important to know where our representatives stand on issues such as these.
Meanwhile, the subject on this upcoming week’s agenda for The Flight of the Dragonfly will be exactly this issue.? I’ve been pouring over the decision (which is not as clear as I imagine anyone would like on this issue) and seeking the guidance of a few better-informed folks.? Maybe I can even talk them into coming on the show, who knows?? But it’s an interesting topic, as questions of Constitutional Law go.
