Latest news with #HouseBill1053
Yahoo
20-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Senate passes porn age-verification bill
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) — House Bill 1053, which would require age verification for porn sites passed the South Dakota Senate in a 34 to 0 vote. One Senator was excused. HB1053 will now go to the desk of Governor Larry Rhoden. The bill, brought by Republican Rep. Bethany Soye, will define a 'covered platform' as a website which, in the regular course of its trade or business, creates, hosts or makes available material harmful to minors, as defined under South Dakota law. It will also require that covered platforms institute 'reasonable age verification' which includes the following options: A state-issued driver license or non-driver identification card The individual's bank account information A debit or credit card from the individual that requires the individual in ownership of the card to be at least eighteen years of age Any other method or document that reliably and accurately indicates if a user of a covered platform is a minor and prevents a minor from accessing the content of a covered platform A failure to implement this age verification would result in a class 1 misdemeanor. The bill also says that platforms cannot sell or retain any identifying information collected for age verification. Enforcement of the law, under the bill, falls to the Attorney General. 16-year-old dies from exposure to freezing temps Prior to debate on the bill, the South Dakota ACLU provided this statement from advocacy manager Samantha Chapman. 'Laws that seek to impose age verification systems on sites with adult content might sound reasonable at first, but the devil is in the details,' said Chapman. 'Under House Bill 1053, adults would be required to upload personal data, such as a photo ID, with companies that claim to verify their age. Efforts to childproof the internet like this not only hurt everyone's ability to access information, but also pose numerous threats to our online privacy and safety. If this bill passes, every single website with any amount of 'material harmful to minors' would require all users to upload their government-issued ID, bank account information, or credit card number to prove their age, and make otherwise suitable content completely off-limits for minors. This is akin to barring minors from an entire library because one shelf contains adult materials.' Following passage of the bill, the ACLU sent out another statement, expressing their opposition to the bill and stating that age verification won't save children from online harm, but will instead invade the privacy of all South Dakotans. 'Is there harmful content on the internet for young viewers? Undoubtedly. But not every societal ill requires a solution from the government. We can, and should, make the internet safer for minors. But we can do this without sacrificing our privacy and Constitutional rights,' wrote Chapman in the ACLU statement. A similar bill to this was killed in the Senate last session, and Soye was also a co-sponsor on a Senate version of this bill, though the opted to draft her own in order to address some concerns with the Senate bill, which was the result of an interim study on the subject. A Senate committee this week opted to move forward with Soye's House bill rather than the Senate bill. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
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
Yahoo
20-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
South Dakota joins 19 states with age-verification law after Senate passes anti-porn bill
PIERRE — South Dakota lawmakers are taking steps to limit access to online pornography by anyone under 18. The state Senate took up House Bill 1053, a bill that would require users to verify they are at least 18 years old to access websites that feature adult content. The bill requires websites considered a "covered platform," or websites which regularly "create, host, or make available material that is harmful to minors," to implement a means of verifying a user's age. These websites would also be prohibited from selling or retaining any identifying information of an individual collected during the verification process. Verification methods include providing a state-issued driver's license or "non-driver identification card"; bank account information; or a debit or credit card. Under the bill, websites that do not comply with user identification requirements would first receive a letter from the attorney general notifying the company of its violation. If new measures are not implemented in 90 days, the company would be fined a civil penalty of up to $5,000 and may be subject to a class one misdemeanor charge. Subsequent violations would open the company up to class six felony charges, according to the bill. A Senate variant defined "covered platforms" similarly but with the small caveat that a website qualifies if 33.3% of its content is considered harmful to minors. On Tuesday, the House version passed out of committee unanimously, while the Senate counterpart was tabled on a five to two vote. And on Wednesday, HB 1053 passed the Senate near-unanimously with 34 "yes" votes — one state senator excused. The legislation went undebated on the floor. If signed into law, South Dakota would become the 20th U.S. state to have passed a law requiring online visitors of adult websites to verify their age. Eighteen of the 19 states have enacted their age-verification law, while Georgia's version of the legislation goes into effect on July 1. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently weighing a Texas case brought by an appeal from the Free Speech Coalition, a group representing the adult entertainment industry, according to NPR. Lawyers for the group argued that a 2023 Texas bill similar to the one passed by the South Dakota Legislature infringes on First Amendment rights for free speech and overly restricts adult access to material that should be protected by the Constitution. The prime sponsor of the House bill, Rep. Bethany Soye, R-Sioux Falls, pointed to Louisiana, one of the first states to pass similar age verification legislation. She said the one-third standard was an "arbitrary" number that other states have tried to copy. "If you look at the decision of the court in each of those places, what they focused on was the one-third standard," Soye told Senate Judiciary members Tuesday. "The idea is, well, OK, one-third of a website is porn, then it's bad for kids, and we should keep them off. If it's 25%, then it's fine. Is that really a compelling state interest? Seems pretty arbitrary." Most of the Tuesday testimony came from supporters of Soye's legislation who focused on the adult entertainment industry and the spread of pornographic content among youth. Lisa Gennaro with Concerned Women for America, a conservative, evangelical Christian nonprofit focused on public policy, said the porn industry is purposefully creating a "flow of content that is toxic for minors." "The porn industry has hijacked our kids, and they know they're doing it," Gennaro said. "They know if they can get them at an early age, then they have a consumer for life." Holly Strand, a forensic examiner with the Pennington County Sheriff's Office, testified to the committee on Tuesday. Strand, who said she is assigned to cases of pornography, exploitation, solicitation and sex trafficking where children are involved, told the committee the word "porn" has trickled down from high school teens into the vocabulary of elementary school children. "About five years ago, we had a kindergartner ask us how to handle pornography, and it was all downhill from there," Strand said. "I had a mom call me … Her son asked her what the word 'anal' meant, and when she asked him where he heard it, his response was, 'There's a kid on the bus that looks at anal on the way to school,' and he doesn't understand why all the kids want to sit next to him when he doesn't even know what that word means." The American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota opposed the legislature's support of the age-verification bill, viewing it as "invasive" and a violation of the privacy and constitutional rights of the state's residents. In a Wednesday press release, ACLU-SD Advocacy Manager Samantha Chapman stated efforts to "childproof the internet" impacts access to information for people broadly, while "failing to actually protect children." "Is there harmful content on the internet for young viewers? Undoubtedly. But not every societal ill requires a solution from the government," Chapman wrote. "We can, and should, make the internet safer for minors. But we can do this without sacrificing our privacy and Constitutional rights." The bill now heads to Gov. Larry Rhoden's desk, where it is likely to be signed into law. This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: South Dakota Senate passes law requiring age verification on porn sites
Yahoo
30-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
We don't need a surveillance state to protect kids online
(Illustration by) Adults have a First Amendment right to look for and access information online, including sexual content. But House Bill 1053, a bill aimed at limiting minors' access to online content, would require people to undergo an invasive age verification process before accessing adult content online. As a parent myself, there are certainly online materials that I don't want my children to view, but I don't need a surveillance state rife with unintended consequences to accomplish this goal. Laws that seek to impose age verification systems on sites with adult content might sound reasonable at first, but the devil is in the details. SD House approves age verification bill; some Democrats raise censorship concerns Under House Bill 1053, adults would be required to upload personal data, such as a photo ID, with companies that claim to verify their age. Efforts to childproof the internet like this not only hurt everyone's ability to access information, but also pose numerous threats to our online privacy and safety. If this bill passes, every single website with any amount of 'material harmful to minors' would require all users to upload their government-issued ID, bank account information, or credit card number to prove their age, and make otherwise suitable content completely off-limits for minors. This is akin to barring minors from an entire library because one shelf contains adult materials. Unlike in-person ID checks, online age verification exposes every website visitor to privacy and security risks. That means it seriously burdens the rights of adults to read, get information, speak and browse online anonymously. Records of our personal information tied to details of the adult content we watch, sexual questions we have, or interests or identities we're exploring could make millions of people vulnerable to harassment, blackmail and exploitation. Because of that, House Bill 1053 would undoubtedly have a chilling effect on free expression online. The legitimate fear of having personal information exposed may deter adults from accessing legal and consensual adult content, thereby limiting their freedom to explore and express themselves in a private digital space. The Supreme Court has ruled that states can restrict a minor's access to adult material, but legislators must navigate a delicate balance mandated by the U.S. Constitution. The law cannot inhibit a minor's access while simultaneously burdening an adult's right to access the same material. In a precedent-setting case, Reno v. ACLU, the courts deemed age verification requirements were unconstitutional when a less restrictive alternative exists. For example, the voluntary installation of parental control filters. In January, the United States Supreme Court heard arguments in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, a challenge to a Texas law that, like House Bill 1053, requires people to undergo an age verification process before accessing adult content online. A decision in the case is expected by early summer 2025. Is there harmful content on the internet for young viewers? Undoubtedly. But not every societal ill requires a solution from the government. Young people deserve our protection and support, but age-gating the internet is not the answer — especially considering that for the more tech-savvy users, all of these attempts at censorship would fall short anyway. The only way that a website can determine whether a user is located in a particular state is to use the geolocation data provided by the user's device. But all you need to get around these censors is a virtual public network, or VPN. Kids can easily circumvent the proposed age verification requirements. Is there harmful content on the internet for young viewers? Undoubtedly. But not every societal ill requires a solution from the government. In this case, parents already have the tools they need to keep explicit and harmful content away from kids. Built-in parental controls allow us to set screen time limits, review app permissions (such as our kids' camera, location and contacts), block apps and approve downloads, block sites and filter content. Despite the numerous tools parents have to keep their kids safe online, fewer than 15% of parents activate these tools. Rather than infringing on constitutional rights, we should focus on educating parents about these existing solutions. Allowing loosely regulated surveillance of our online activity is dangerous and opens the door for government censorship. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
