Revise certain provisions related to the restriction of access to obscene materials in a public library or public school library.
Summary
HB 1239 revises South Dakota’s rules for restricting minors’ access to obscene materials in public libraries and public school libraries. It requires each public school and each public library to either install filtering software on public access computers or obtain internet service with filtering capabilities that limit access to obscene material as defined in state law.
The bill also requires both schools and libraries to adopt and implement a local policy by January 1, 2025, setting out measures to restrict minors from accessing obscene matter or materials. Those policies must include a process for an individual to appeal a determination that material is obscene, with the final decision made by the school board or library governing body and subject to judicial review. The policy must also be made publicly available either on the relevant website or through annual publication in a designated legal newspaper.
Impact
HB 1239 amends §§ 22-24-55 and 22-24-56 of the South Dakota Codified Laws, expanding and clarifying obligations for public schools and public libraries regarding internet filtering and local review procedures for obscene materials. It affects school districts, public libraries, and their governing boards by imposing policy-adoption, publication, and appeal requirements, while preserving court review of obscenity determinations.
Sentiment
The voting history suggests the bill was generally supported but not without division. It advanced through committee and floor votes, including a narrow 38-32 House passage and a closer 36-34 concurrence vote, indicating substantial concern even as majorities favored the measure. Overall, the sentiment appears to have been supportive of restricting minors’ access to obscene materials, with enough opposition to make the bill contentious.
Contention
The main points of contention appear to have been the scope of government-mandated filtering and the local policy requirements imposed on schools and libraries. Opponents likely objected to the administrative burden, the potential impact on access to information, and the process for determining what counts as obscene, while supporters emphasized protecting minors and giving local boards a formal review process. The close votes, especially in the House, indicate disagreement over balancing child protection, library/school autonomy, and free-access concerns.