Library Internet filtering policy unconstitutional, court rules.

In a landmark decision, a federal judge in Virginia recently struck down as unconstitutional a county library policy requiring filtering software to be installed on library computers to block access to pornographic material. (Mainstream Loudoun v. Board of Trustees of the Loudoun County Library, No. 97-2049-A (E.D. Va. Nov. 23, 1998).)

U.S. District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema found that the Loudoun County, Virginia, policy violated adult library patrons' First Amendment rights. The judge said the policy prevented them from using library computers to access constitutionally protected materials on the Internet and the World Wide Web.

The policy was adopted in late 1997 by the county library's board of trustees to protect children from viewing sexually explicit sites and to avoid creating a sexually hostile environment. Shortly after, the library installed filtering software called X-Stop, which blocks access to Internet sites that contain certain sex-related words or phrases.

But the filter also blocked access to nonpornographic Web pages, including one about the Quaker religion and others meant to provide sex education. This, said plaintiffs--a civic organization called Mainstream Loudoun and a handful of individuals--violated their First Amendment free speech rights by blocking "a substantial amount of speech that is not obscene or otherwise constitutionally proscribable and that adults have a right to receive."

Brinkema agreed. Applying strict scrutiny analysis, the judge found that the policy was not necessary to further a compelling government interest because the defendant could cite to only four reported incidents nationally of libraries encountering problems related to unfiltered Internet access.

"No reasonable trier of fact could conclude that three isolated incidents nationally, and one very minor isolated incident in Virginia, no evidence whatsoever of problems in Loudoun County, and not a single employee complaint from anywhere in the country establish that the policy is necessary to prevent sexual harassment or access to obscenity or child pornography," Brinkema wrote.

The judge also found the policy "over-inclusive because, on its face, it limits the access of all patrons, adult and juvenile, to material deemed fit for juveniles." The defendant could have used less restrictive means to achieve its goals, including putting privacy screens around computers, instructing library staff to monitor children's computer use, and installing filtering software on computers set aside for use by children only, Brinkema said.

The decision is likely to affect library policies throughout the nation. Nearly every public library has or is developing a policy governing acceptable Internet use, according to a recent survey by the American Library Association. About 14 percent of public libraries use Internet filters, researchers found.

The U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science is currently collecting information in anticipation of preparing guidelines for public libraries on children's access to the Internet. At a recent hearing before the commission, Andrew Vachss, a Forest Hills, New York, lawyer who specializes in child abuse cases, said libraries should stop using filters because they are ineffective. Instead, he said, libraries should be restricting children's access to "chat rooms," where pedophiles and child molesters look for potential victims. (Libraries Are Urged to Stop Filtering Internet Content and Instead Restrict Childrens' Access, The Freedom Forum and Newseum News, Dec. 1998, at 9.)

The Loudoun County board may have been listening. By a 6-2 vote with one member absent, it recently decided to allow adults and children unfiltered access to the Internet on library computers.