Porn, or no porn at libraries?

Washington state Supreme Court ruled Thursday on the hot topic of Internet pornography in public libraries.

In a six to

In a six to three decision, the justices ruled that libraries may filter pornographic sites from computers without violating state constitutional guarantees of free speech, said Dave Ammons, with the Secretary of State’s office.

However, the issue may not be so simple.

Mary Kelly, community relations director for Sno-Isle libraries, said she’s not sure what the implication will be for local libraries.

Currently, Sno-Isle Libraries’Internet use policy requires filtered access to those 17 and younger. Patrons over the age of 17 can request unfiltered access.

“Our policy is in compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2003 ruling regarding the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), which has not changed,” Kelly said.

Adopted in 2001, CIPA mandated that in order to receive federal funding, libraries and schools must filter Internet access for minors. The American Libraries Association (ALA) challenged this law on the basis of freedom of speech, and in 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that filtering Internet access for minors was not an infringement on constitutional rights. However, the court ruled, unfiltered access must be provided upon request to those who aren’t minors.

Because Sno-Isle Libraries receives e-rate discounts from the federal government, which offset the cost of technology, Kelly said the system must abide by this decision.

“As far as I’m aware, this won’t change our policy,” she said, but she added that time will tell.

A federal ruling may follow.

Jan Walsh, state librarian, said in a press release, “I believe this 6-3 Supreme Court ruling, and the federal ruling that we expect will follow, provides public libraries with permission to adopt a reasonable filter system if that fits the needs of their community. We support libraries listening to their patrons. If that value is to have no filter, then that’s fine. ” Walsh also said she doesn’t believe filtering Internet access is a freedom of-speech issue.

Neither did the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003. Their ruling stated, “A library’s decision to use filtering software is a collection decision, not a restraint on private speech.”

Because libraries are a finite collection of material, set aside for the use of a community, they are not considered a public forum, which is what the freedom of speech amendment protects.

Walsh added, “We have filters on our Washington state library computers, and the K-20 computer backbone also is filtered. As today’s majority rules notes, public libraries have long enjoyed broad discretion to select materials for their collections, and it makes sense that the same discretion would apply to the vast amount of materials on the Internet.”

Staff Reporter Jeremiah O’Hagan: 629-8066 ext. 125 or ohagan@scnews.com.