The sponsors of a bipartisan bill intended to strengthen age restrictions for accessing sexual content online are pulling the measure this session despite widespread support, because of concerns from Gov. Jared Polis, as well as an upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision on the issue.
In a statement on Monday, Democratic Sen. Lindsey Daugherty, D-Arvada, and Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen, R-Monument said that it doesn’t make sense to move Senate Bill 201 through the process this year, even though they are confident it could pass. It cleared its first Senate committee 8-1.
“This bill is about protecting children,” they said. “We are not banning pornography, and we are not restricting an adult’s access to legal content. We are simply providing the means to enforce laws that already exist.”
Another main sponsor, Democratic Rep. Mandy Lindsay, D-Aurora said there was a lot of misinformation around the proposal.
“I’m disappointed by the porn industry’s messaging around this issue. As bill sponsors, we're committed to thoughtful and inclusive policy.”
The backers also cited Polis’ reservations.
“The Governor has expressed concerns with the legislation related to the pending Supreme Court ruling in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, amongst other things,” Daugherty said.
The Supreme Court has already heard oral arguments in a lawsuit challenging a similar policy in Texas that requires websites that publish sexual material deemed “harmful to minors” to verify a user's age before they can access the website. A trade association for the pornography and adult entertainment industry, the Free Speech Coalition, sued to challenge the law.
In a statement to CPR News, Polis’ office said he supports a free and open internet as well as more tools for parents to ensure kids access only appropriate content.
“He appreciates the sponsors taking more time with this important issue,” read the statement. “There will be more legal clarity on how states can effectively legislate after the court rules on Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton this summer.”
Opponents of these types of policies say even though they are intended to protect children, they put undue burdens on adults’ access to protected speech. There are also concerns about the definition of harmful content to minors. The ACLU, which opposes the Texas Act, said to include age restrictions on anything “obscene, from the perspective of an average person considering the material’s effect on minors” is inherently vague.
“As a practical matter, it covers virtually all salacious content—for example, sex-education videos and R-rated movies.”
Another major social media bill that already cleared both chambers with broad bipartisan support also faces opposition from Polis. Senate Bill 86 would require large social media companies to comply with law enforcement search warrants within 72 hours unless a court grants an extension. That would apply in investigations of illegal activities such as selling firearms, trafficking minors and sexually exploitative material involving minors, and selling drugs. Companies must also maintain a staffed hotline for communicating with state law enforcement agencies related to search warrants.
It also requires companies to investigate and flag user complaints for accounts that appear to be violating those policies and engaging in illegal activity. If a complaint is not false, the companies would have 10 days to investigate and then 24 hours to terminate an account that violated the policies. Colorado would also receive an annual report from social media companies on their enforcement actions and information on how many minors use the platform and for how often and how long, and how much they interact with content that violates the company’s policies.
Polis’ office testified against the proposal. A spokesman said he has serious concerns about the bill’s impact on freedom, innovation, and privacy.
“He is not comfortable with the government forcing private social media companies to act as law enforcement, and will review the final version of the legislation,” said Eric Maruyama, a spokesman for Polis.
Some Republicans also oppose the bill over concerns that it could infringe on Second Amendment rights, but Republican sponsor Sen. Lisa Frizell of Douglas County pushed back on that assertion and said the bill does not create any new limitations on gun ownership or transactions.
“It only addresses gun sales that violate existing state and federal law,” Frizell said.
Colorado’s Democratic Attorney General Phil Weiser, who is running for governor, is a backer of the bill. Supporters also include many district attorneys, and several school districts, the Colorado Parent Teacher Association, and the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police and Colorado Children’s Hospital among others.
“Social media platforms have policies that prohibit these egregious illegal activities, but enforcement of these policies has been grossly inadequate,” said a letter from supporters of the bill to Polis urging him to sign the legislation. “Our children continue to be involuntarily surrounded by these intolerable activities when they use social media.”
Supporters gathered at the Capitol on Monday urging Polis not to veto the bill. They say that social media companies are unregulated, unmonitored spaces. Parents who have lost children to accidental drug overdoses from drugs purchased through social media say in many cases the companies won’t cooperate with law enforcement so cases go unsolved.
