Lawmakers approve sweeping approach to internet porn age verification
State Rep. Bethany Soye, R-Sioux Falls, speaks with lawmakers on the South Dakota House floor during the governor's budget address on Dec. 3, 2024. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight)
PIERRE — More than a dozen states have passed or are considering laws to require porn sites to ask adults who want to visit them for personal information to prove their age.
So far, each of them — including Texas, whose law had an audience with the U.S. Supreme Court last month — have applied the rule to sites on which a third or more of the content counts as pornography.
South Dakota could soon be the first state to affix the expectation to any site that hosts any pornography in the 'regular course of the website's trade or business.'
Legislative committee endorses prosecution of librarians who lend books deemed harmful to children
On Wednesday at the state Capitol, the Senate voted 34-0 to send that bill to the desk of Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden.
'It's a huge step forward,' said Sen. Jim Mehlhaff, R-Pierre, a prime sponsor of House Bill 1053. 'It's time to jump on board and protect our children from pornography on the internet.'
No senators spoke against the bill on the Senate floor. The Senate Judiciary Committee spent more than an hour hearing testimony on age verification on Tuesday, however.
There was broad agreement in the committee room on the need to address the omnipresence of online pornography.
'It used to be years ago that when we went into schools, we only heard the word 'porn' in schools. Then it became middle school,' said Holly Strand, a Rapid City forensic interviewer in child sex crime investigations. 'About five years ago, we had a kindergartner ask us how to handle pornography. It was all downhill from there.'
The Senate panel had two options for age verification on its plate Tuesday.
Each aimed to force adult sites to ask visitors for something like a credit card or state-issued driver's license to prove they're old enough to be there. Both required the deletion of that data after the visit. Each would let South Dakota's attorney general levy criminal fines against companies that don't comply.
One of them, Senate Bill 18, rejected by the committee, follows the model of Texas by targeting sites where one-third of the content is adult material.
SD House approves age verification bill; some Democrats raise censorship concerns
HB 1053 draws no such line.
The House bill came from Rep. Bethany Soye, R-Sioux Falls. On Tuesday, she said the one-third figure was pulled from thin air by Louisiana lawmakers looking to preempt concerns about an overly broad restriction in their age verification legislation.
'Every state just blindly copied them,' said Soye, who is an attorney. 'And I think that we can do better than that.'
To her, the one-third standard amounts to an invitation for porn sites to find ways to keep their total adult content just below the line, perhaps at 29.9% pornography.
'You can already see the loophole,' Soye said.
The Texas law, which is similar to Louisiana's, had a hearing in the U.S. Supreme Court last month. The justices won't decide themselves if such laws violate the First Amendment. Instead, the high court is poised to decide how strict lower courts must be as they rule on the constitutionality of age verification laws.
Attorney General Marty Jackley told the committee his office would support the state in a lawsuit over either bill.
'I believe this is something that should've been addressed by Congress, but in their absence, you have to act,' Jackley said.
He'd prefer to defend the Senate version that mirrors Texas, though.
So would Doug Abraham. He's the South Dakota lobbyist for The App Association, which bills itself as a trade group for small tech businesses. He said the lack of a standard for how much content needs to be adult material creates 'overbreadth' concerns.
Expecting every app or website with potentially pornographic content to ask for personal information from its users is akin to expecting a mall with a liquor store to make sure every visitor is 21, Abraham said.
'You'd be carding everybody who goes into the mall,' he told the committee.
No bill will prevent determined children from accessing pornography, many supporters conceded, but the stricter the rules, the better the chances.
'Even if this prevents one child in our state from earlier exposure to porn, this bill is a success,' said Strand, the forensic examiner.
Samantha Chapman of the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota voiced concerns about constitutionality.
'All means of age verification that are currently available to us today present substantial risks to anonymous web browsing and internet privacy, which will create a chilling effect on content that is legally available,' Chapman said.
South Dakota attorney general tells lawmakers to consider age verification for porn sites
There are tools available to parents now, she said. There are other approaches that haven't been tried yet, such as age verification that ties content access to the age of a device's user.
Beyond First Amendment concerns with HB 1053's approach, she pointed to worries over the practice of scanning and sharing personal data to access sensitive content. People could intercept the data for use in extortion, she suggested, regardless of a state law's requirement that data be deleted.
'The mere presence of government-issued IDs being scanned and transmitted online, presents risk, the potential for hackers and thieves, and potentially hostile foreign governments to take that data into and to use it,' she said.
Chapman testified against both bills, while conceding that SB 18 would be preferable because it would sweep in fewer websites.
Sen. David Wheeler, R-Huron, is chair of the Judiciary Committee. He had questions about how broadly HB 1053 would apply, wondering if it could sweep up streaming services like Netflix if the site regularly hosts movies arguably deemed pornographic.
After the committee rejected the other bill, he joined other committee members in voting for Soye's bill.
'At this point, since I have no other option, I'm going to support 1053,' Wheeler said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

44 minutes ago
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools, churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey, alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision. Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.'


Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools , churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey , alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision . Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Who's running for office? Georgia candidates announce 2026 bids
State Rep. Derrick Jackson, a Tyrone Democrat, has become the latest candidate to launch a bid for governor. The 2026 elections are more than a year away, but campaign announcement season in Georgia is in full swing, as candidates seek to secure a position under the Peach State's iconic Gold Dome. State Rep. Derrick Jackson, a Tyrone Democrat, has become the latest candidate to launch a bid for governor, unveiling a campaign Friday that highlighted his military service, business experience and focus on advocating for Georgia residents' civil rights. 'When I see something that's not right, that's not fair, that's unjust, I have a moral obligation as an elected official,' he said in an interview with the Georgia Recorder, citing a conversation he had with the late civil rights icon and long-time Georgia Congressman John Lewis that inspired him to run for governor. 'I realized we are in a political season right now where I need to do more.' He said he hopes to implement policies that would benefit working families in Georgia, including a $20 minimum wage and eliminating state taxes for teachers, nurses, military veterans and senior citizens. 'A lot of citizens are looking at this American dream, and they see it fading away because of some of the laws and policies that we put in place in Georgia,' he said. 'And so as governor, I would be in the pivotal place to stop some of these harmful pieces of legislation that are negatively impacting families in urban, suburban, rural and underserved areas in Georgia.' Jackson, a General Electric marketing executive, began his first term in the state House in 2017, but emphasized his 42 years of leadership experience throughout his time in the U.S. Navy, the Legislature and in his private sector work. He joins fellow legislator Sen. Jason Esteves of Atlanta and former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms on the Democratic ballot. On the Republican side, Attorney General Chris Carr is the only announced candidate, but with Gov. Brian Kemp term-limited from running again, there will likely be a long list of GOP primary candidates. Lt. Gov. Burt Jones is widely expected to mount a run for governor. This also isn't Jackson's first bid for higher office. In 2022 he ran for lieutenant governor, but finished sixth in the Democratic primary. He returned to the State Legislature in 2023 after winning a special election to replace Rep. Tish Naghise, a Fayetteville Democrat who died during her first term. Most recently, he ran for House Minority Leader in 2024 but lost to Rep. Carolyn Hugley, a Columbus Democrat. The gubernatorial race isn't the only statewide contest that's getting competitive. Among the candidates who launched campaigns this week are state Sen. Brian Strickland, a McDonough Republican who is entering the race for attorney general, and President Pro Tem John F. Kennedy, a Macon Republican hoping to become Georgia's next lieutenant governor. Democratic state Rep. Jasmine Clark of Lilburn also launched a bid for Congress this week, vying to unseat incumbent Rep. David Scott to represent Georgia's 13th congressional district. Ahead of this year's Aug. 26 special election, candidates are vying for a chance to replace outgoing state Sen. Brandon Beach, an Alpharetta Republican who President Donald Trump appointed to serve as U.S. Treasurer earlier this year. A total of seven candidates — six Republicans and one Democrat — are hoping to fill his shoes. Farooq Mughal, the former Democratic state representative from Dacula, is seeking reelection after losing his seat in one of Georgia's narrowest state legislative races of the 2024 season. Mughal made history as the first Pakistani-American in the Legislature when he was elected in 2022. However, after the 2023 redistricting cycle drew more conservative voters into his district, he became the target of a governor-backed effort to flip some of the most competitive House districts red, losing to Republican challenger Sandy Donatucci in 2024 by only 80 votes. Now, he's hoping to return to the legislature with an agenda focused on supporting public schools, securing tax relief for families and addressing gun violence. 'It was the honor of my life to serve the people of District 105,' Mughal said in a statement announcing his candidacy. 'I'm running to return to the State House because there's still critical work to be done for Gwinnett families.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX