Bill would criminalize exposing children to ‘obscene performances’

Exposing minors to an “obscene” performance would be a crime under a bill that lawmakers advanced on Wednesday.

The bill would also allow a parent or guardian to bring a civil lawsuit against those who expose their child to such material or performances.

Senate File 2176 would make it a misdemeanor offense to either expose a minor, sell a minor a ticket, or admit a minor, to a performance that involves the exposure of genitalia or sexual acts and which “appeals to the prurient interest and is patently offensive.” Performances must lack “serious artistic, literary, political or scientific value” to qualify as obscene under the proposed law.

Keenan Crow with One Iowa, a LGBTQ advocacy group, said the organization has no problem with prohibiting minors from viewing obscene performances, adding that the language of the bill is “largely unobjectionable.” However, Crow said, One Iowa sees a problem with the language allowing a parental figure to bring a lawsuit over exposure to an “obscene performance” — a provision that would likely be used to target drag performances and other LGBTQ events.

“I have no doubt that basically every drag performance I’ve ever seen does not meet the definition of obscenity,” Crow said. “What I’m worried about is that there will be some extremely litigious activists on this that will bring suit, after suit, after suit, after suit. Now, will those parties (who are being sued) ultimately prevail? Yeah, but lawsuits are time consuming, they’re expensive, and they can ultimately be used as a tool for harassment.”

Sen. Mike Klimesh, R-Spillville, voiced similar concerns, saying the language of the bill does not make it clear who could be subject to litigation under the bill’s current language. For example, if a smalltown library holds an event that a parent sees as an obscene performance and files a suit, Klimesh said, it’s unclear whether the town’s mayor would be held liable.

“Where does the liability train stop?” he asked. “Does it stop with the individual that organized the event? Does it stop with city government, does it stop with the mayor?”

Klimesh voted in support of moving the bill forward with an amendment clarifying the scope of potential lawsuits.

Sen. Sandy Salmon, R-Janesville, who sponsored the bill, said that the measure should not be controversial, and that the bill gives parents a way to “safeguard their children” from harm.

“Exposing a child to obscenity is harmful to children’s sexuality and sexual identity,” Salmon said. “It is morally and socially destructive. It breaks down children’s God-given modesty, their natural inhibitions regarding sexuality and sexual activity, which all help to protect their innocence and protect them from sexual abuse and exploitation.”

Sen. Janice Weiner, D-Iowa City, voted against advancing the bill, but praised it for defining obscenity based on the Miller test — the approach established by the U.S. Supreme Court, which Democratic lawmakers  favored during the debate over a 2023 law restricting books involving sex acts and any teachings related to gender and sexuality for K-6 students.

Weiner said she did not support the bill in its current form because it could have a “chilling effect” on events like drag shows or pride parades.

Sen. Cherielynn Westrich, R-Ottumwa, said lawmakers will revisit the topic of lawsuits in the bill but added that is an important element to protect children.

“It’s not my intention with this bill to target any specific groups,” Westrich said. “And, you know, whether it’s — where children are present — whether it’s a movie or other materials or a performance in-person, I think this gives our parents and our county attorney the tools they need to protect our children.”