HOUSE BILL REPORT
HB 1660
BYRepresentatives Hargrove, Padden, Scott, Kremen, Patrick, Brough, Basich, Ferguson, Haugen and Youngsman
Describing what materials and acts are considered pornographic and harmful to minors.
House Committe on Judiciary
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. (18)
Signed by Representatives Appelwick, Chair; Crane, Vice Chair; Padden, Ranking Republican Member; Belcher, Brough, Dellwo, Hargrove, Inslee, Locke, R. Meyers, Moyer, H. Myers, Patrick, Schmidt, Scott, D. Sommers, Tate and Wineberry.
House Staff:Steve Masciocchi (786-7377)
AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY FEBRUARY 28, 1989
BACKGROUND:
Washington law prohibits the sale, distribution, or exhibition of erotic materials to minors. Erotic materials are defined as those which appeal to the prurient interest of minors in sex, are patently offensive, and are utterly without redeeming social value. This definition is patterned after a statute upheld by the Supreme Court in Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968).
The prohibition applies only to materials which have been determined by a court to be erotic upon petition of the prosecuting attorney. If the court determines the material is erotic, it must be labeled as adults only material. A person who violates the labeling provision is guilty of a misdemeanor for the first offense, a gross misdemeanor for the second offense, and a felony for the third and subsequent offenses. An exemption is provided for public libraries.
SUMMARY:
SUBSTITUTE BILL: The current provisions governing distribution of "erotic" materials to minors are repealed and replaced with provisions prohibiting the display, sale, or distribution to minors of materials which are "harmful to minors." The term "harmful to minors material" is defined as any material which, applying contemporary community standards, appeals to the prurient interest of minors, has patently offensive depictions or descriptions of explicit sexual conduct, and which lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors. This definition corresponds with the updated definition of obscenity in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973).
Material which is harmful to minors includes live performances and written and visual materials. There is no requirement for a court to determine that material is harmful to minors before prosecution can commence. A person who knowingly displays harmful to minors materials in a manner in which minors may view it, sells or distributes harmful to minors materials to a minor, or presents a live performance which is harmful to minors is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. Each day that a person engages in a prohibited activity is a separate offense and every act or transaction that is prohibited is a separate offense. The public library exemption is retained.
SUBSTITUTE BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL: The substitute extends the public library exemption to any public or private school library.
Fiscal Note: Not Requested.
House Committee ‑ Testified For: Chris Quinn-Britnal, WAPA; Helen Johnson; Muriel McKray.
House Committee - Testified Against: Bob Seeber, Washington Publications Distributors; Jerry Sheehan, ACLU; Mark Allen, Washington Library Association; Bill Fritz, Motion Picture Association of America.
House Committee - Testimony For: The bill is needed to protect children from exploitation. The public library exemption is important and has been upheld by the Washington Supreme Court.
House Committee - Testimony Against: It is too difficult to determine what is being regulated. Lay persons need better notice of what constitutes material that is "harmful to minors." The bill is unconstitutional under the first amendment since it prohibits display of materials that are not legally obscene. The bill may be unconstitutional under the fourteenth amendment because of the exemption for public libraries. The bill will chill the exercise of first amendment rights.