Bill that aims to keep children from viewing porn online advances in SC Senate

COLUMBIA — Despite potential First Amendment concerns, a bill requiring age verification on pornographic websites advanced to the Senate floor Thursday, a day after a related bill that sets age restrictions and parental consent to access social media stalled in a subcommittee.

Both bills passed the House back-to-back in January with only one legislator voting against each. Advocates say the legislation is needed to protect children, while opponents counter the pair also unfairly limits the rights of adults.

Only one — the bill requiring South Carolinians to be at least 18 to see porn online — seems to stand a chance at becoming law this year. Lawmakers acknowledge that, if signed into law, it will almost certainly be challenged in court. But they say preventing children from seeing graphic, harmful images — perhaps unintentionally — is worth the try.

Pornography is protected as free speech under the First Amendment, so restrictions must be narrow, said Sen. Tom Davis, who led Thursday’s meeting.

Whether the legislation meets that standard will be up to the courts, said the Beaufort Republican.

“As a matter of general policy, we ought not be afraid to act because something might be unconstitutional,” Davis told the SC Daily Gazette. “This area is unsettled, and the way you get the matter settled as a matter of constitutional law is by taking action and then having that legislation subject to the judicial process.”

South Carolina is not the only state considering this issue.

According to the Free Speech Coalition, which represents the adult entertainment industry, six states have enacted similar laws, including Kentucky earlier this month. In March, PornHub blocked access to its site in Texas when a federal appeals court upheld part of a similar law.

Several parents testified in support of the proposal at Wednesday’s hearing.

“I simply represent all the mothers in our state,” Brittany Shipley of Saluda told senators. “I am passionate about seeing the laws change in our state for the porn industry.”

The lone opponent at the hearing was Greg Gonzalez of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expressions (FIRE) in Washington, D.C.

He said the U.S. Supreme Court has been skeptical about age verification laws because of the amount of information someone has to provide to prove their age and identity.

“The Supreme Court has made clear that the right to freedom of speech necessarily includes the right to speak anonymously,” Gonzalez said, citing a 20-year-old ruling.

In Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, the nation’s high court blocked the Child Online Protection Act passed by Congress. In a 5-4 split vote, justices sent the case back to a lower court that found it unconstitutionally overly broad.

Some of Gonzalez’s concerns were echoed by a Senate legal staffer, who said it’s unclear how defensible the bill would be if challenged in court.

The decision to move ahead anyway was bipartisan.

Sen. Ronnie Sabb, D-Greeleyville, said the bill could be adjusted depending on how courts ruled.

Sen. Sean Bennett, who led the subcommittee, said both age verification for pornography and the bill limiting children’s social media access challenged his basic instinct to keep government out of people’s lives. At least when it came to porn, though, he was willing to take the risk.

“Sometimes you have to make a policy that says it’s important. Our children are important. People are important,” said the Summerville Republican. “’Damn the torpedoes.’ Our policy position … which we may be forced to work out later by courts, is we want to do everything we can to protect that vulnerable population.”

The panel delayed doing anything with the social media bill, however, leaving it in subcommittee for more discussion with essentially just six days left in the regular session.

By law, the 2024 session ends May 9, and senators will be occupied next week with debating that chamber’s budget plan.

While making social media safer for children is also a compelling policy issue, Bennett said, more research is needed on other potential solutions, especially given the resistance of social media sites.

“We’re going to have to ask the hard questions,” he told the Gazette.