Should libraries censor patrons' surfing?

• Author: Swartz, Nikki
• Position: Up front: news, trends & analysis

The Supreme Court said it will decide before July whether Congress can require public libraries to install software to filter out explicit sexual materials as a condition for receiving federal money.

In a case that pits free speech against the U.S. government's ability to protect the public from what it deems inappropriate content, the government will try to revive the Children's Internet Protection Act of 2001. The act requires public libraries that receive federal money to block access to online pornography and obscenity. It also permits librarians to override filters if a patron is trying to obtain materials that have been wrongly blocked, such as breast cancer research.

Because of legal challenges by the American Library Association (ALA), library patrons, Web publishers, and others who say the act is censorship, the law has not taken effect. Paul Smith, an attorney for the ALA, told justices that with 11 million Web sites, it is impossible for filter operators to keep up with pornographic sites. Librarians and civil liberties groups contend that filters are censorship and block a vast amount of valuable information along with the pornography. And according to a recent New York Times editorial, filtering software "overblocks" by 15 percent or more.

Last May, a three-judge panel in Pennsylvania ruled that a filter requirement would force public libraries to violate patrons' First Amendment rights. The...