Proposal on warning labels for pornography passes Utah House

SALT LAKE CITY — A proposal to require warning labels on pornography in Utah passed the state House on Tuesday, a move an adult-entertainment industry group called a dark day for freedom of expression.

GOP state Rep. Brady Brammer, the lawmaker behind the plan to mandate the labels about potential harm to minors, says it’s aimed at catching the “worst of the worst.”

The measure would allow private citizens to file complaints and carries a potential penalty of up to $2,500 for each violation.

It now moves to the Utah Senate for consideration.

Republican lawmakers praised the idea from Brammer, calling it a creative way to deal with the increasing availability of pornography online. It would apply to any material that appears in Utah and would be enforced through civil rather than criminal courts, allowing the state and private groups to file suit against producers.

“I’ve had constituents, including some dear friends, bring to me their personal stories of the truly horrific and nightmarish costs their families have suffered because their child has been exposed to these sorts of things,” said Republican Rep. Travis Seegmiller.

Deeply conservative Utah, where a majority of people are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, declared pornography a public health crisis in 2016. Since then, more than a dozen states have advanced similar proposals.

The new measure in Utah is aimed at obscene material, a narrow legal definition that doesn’t apply to much of what is considered pornographic. But the way the law is written could still allow for thousands of lawsuits, said Mike Stabile, a spokesman for the Free Speech Coalition, a pornography and adult-entertainment trade group.

“Really it just sort of opens up the floodgates for lawsuits over all sorts of content,” he said. Even if material isn’t declared obscene, producers would have to defend a lawsuit until a judge makes that determination, he said.

While porn producers say they don’t intend their material for juveniles, they also don’t agree with the proposed language of the warning, which states that exposing minors to porn is “known … to cause negative impacts to brain development, emotional development and the ability to maintain intimate relationships.”

Stabile argues that has not been proven and forcing producers to add the warning could also violate First Amendment rules against compelled speech. One pornography website has mocked the bill, putting out a label on its content saying “porn may lead to decreased stress, increased happiness, and lower rates of teen pregnancy.”

Still, Brammer said filters haven’t proven effective at keeping porn from kids. His proposal would require the label to appear on printed material and be displayed for 15 seconds before a digital recording.

“I think it will make a difference,” he said. “It won’t stop every problem related to obscenity, it will not stop all obscenity, but it will move the ball further down the field.”