Supreme Court hears CIPA appeal arguments

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on whether a law that requires libraries to install Internet filtering software on computers to gain some federal funding is constitutional.

The American Library Association (ALA) and other groups are arguing that the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) is unconstitutional, saying that its Net filtering mandate stymies free speech and research capabilities.

CIPA, which was passed by Congress in 2000, was designed primarily to block children from accessing pornography and other explicit material online. Opponents of the law say that filtering software is imprecise, however, and often blocks benign sites containing health information, for example. Additionally, they argue that the legislation prevents adults from accessing information that they have the right to view.

“This technology cannot and does not protect children,” said Emily Sheketoff, executive director of the ALA’s Washington office. “Not only does it not block out all objectionable material, the filters block material that is constitutionally protected.”

A three-judge panel in Pennsylvania ruled the filtering provisions unconstitutional in May of last year, saying that they would “block access to substantial amounts of constitutionally protected free speech whose suppression serves no legitimate government interest.” The Supreme Court justices are now due to decide on the fate of the legislation.

Sheketoff said that they are hoping to receive a decision before the court recesses in July.