51¶ÌÊÓƵ

Sen. Dave Murman said his bill (LB1092) would protect children by prohibiting adult websites from showing pornographic content to users unless they first submitted identification showing they were over the age of 18.

"While it is currently federally illegal to show children pornography, it is rarely enforced," Murman told the Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. "Instead, the online pornography industry virtually has free rein to distribute content to children."

The Glenvil lawmaker said the bill requires adult websites or third-party companies contracted by them to provide verification while not retaining any personal information, and gives individuals, parents or guardians a right to sue adult websites that do not comply with the state law.

He called it "common sense" legislation that has been signed into law in a growing number of states across the country, as lawmakers seek to put barriers around "a porn industry many have considered impossible to regulate."

Murman, who designated LB1092 his priority bill this session, said it was modeled from a measure enacted in Louisiana in 2022 requiring adult content websites to verify users are over the age of 18.

Similar bills also have been passed in Arkansas, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, Texas, Utah and Virginia in the past year, which led Pornhub and other similar sites to block users from several states.

Along with Nebraska, Indiana, Iowa and North Dakota are considering legislation this year requiring users to show their age before they can access pornographic sites online.

Opponents of those laws argue the ways state legislatures have implemented age verification are ineffective because they push users to sites that do not follow the law and are dangerous because they collect significant amounts of personal information.

After Utah's law went into effect in 2023, for example, searches for "virtual private networks," or VPNs that allow users to get around the law, ultimately skyrocketed, according to trends recorded by Google at the time.

The laws also have drawn legal challenges in multiple states from the Free Speech Coalition, a trade association for the adult entertainment industry, which argues they are unconstitutional because they restrict free speech by not allowing access unless a user submits personal data.

In Texas, a federal judge ruled the law likely violated the First Amendment last year and issued an injunction against the state enforcing it, but a three-judge panel on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals later vacated the injunction.

A lawsuit against Utah's law was dismissed on technical grounds but refiled in January.

On Wednesday, national and local organizations that advocate for religious and family values said limiting the availability of pornographic material to minors would improve mental and emotional well-being, and help young people in their physical and social development.

Joseph Kohm, the director of public policy for Family Policy Alliance, an offshoot of the Christian ministry-based Focus on the Family, said a growing number of Americans were being exposed to pornography at earlier ages, including some as young as 7 years old.

Responding to a question from Sen. Carol Blood of Bellevue, who asked why legislation was necessary for parents and guardians to exercise their rights to control what their children had access to, Kohm said the bill gave parents another tool to make decisions for their children.

"This is not giving guidance to parents," Kohm said. "It is simply making sure parents are the ones to expose their children to any loss of their sexual innocence."

The Institute for Family Studies, a Virginia-based nonprofit that has advocated for similar legislation in other states, also testified in support of LB1092, calling it a bipartisan measure to address a problem an overwhelming majority of parents see as a problem.

Michael Toscano, the organization's executive director, said a 2020 poll done in conjunction with YouGov found 86% of parents believe it was too easy for children to access pornography online.

"The porn industry argues that free speech requires that American adults get their porn without delay, no matter the effect on little kids," Toscano said. "But the porn industry is not about speech, it's about money."

Citing statements made to CNN by a spokesperson for Pornhub, Toscano said Louisiana's age verification law resulted in a drop of 80% of traffic to the website from users in that state, though he said not all of those would be minors.

Murman's bill also was backed by the Nebraska Family Alliance, which called it an "opportunity to provide a minimal level of protection for children in the digital age," as well as the Nebraska Catholic Conference, the lobbying arm of the church.

Speaking against the bill were a pair of free speech and civil rights groups, which argued it could be used to stifle other content on the internet or would violate the rights and privacy of Nebraskans.

Korby Gilbertson, a lobbyist for Media of Nebraska, said "protecting children from pornography is important," but that LB1092 was too broad in the types of content it sought to require age verification to view.

"In our opinion, this is not narrowly tailored," Gilbertson said. "We think it opens up the state to immediate challenges, constitutionally, if this would pass."

And Jane Seu, a policy and legal advisor for the ACLU of Nebraska, said the age verification law included in LB1092 would have a chilling effect on free speech because it had "vague and amorphous" language that made it unclear when the restrictions would apply.

It also violated the privacy and anonymity of internet users who were breaking no laws by requiring them to prove their age to visit certain websites, she said.

"Courts have found these policies are unconstitutional because there are less restrictive means to advance interests of internet safety without placing blanket burdens on all users and exposing their private information and identities," Seu said.

The committee did not take any action on the bill Wednesday, Day 31 of the 60-day legislative session. Committee hearings are scheduled to continue through the end of February.

Sen. Barry DeKay of Niobrara, a member of the Judiciary Committee, signaled his support for advancing the bill, however.

"It may not be a fix-all, but it takes us a lot farther down the road," he said.