BOISE, Idaho — Debate in the Idaho state Senate this week, over a copycat bill that would require device manufacturers to enable "pornography filters" on devices used by minors, divided members of the Republican supermajority, 12 of whom voted against the measure.
SB 1253, introduced by Republican Sen. Kevin Cook, still passed 23-12, with 16 Republicans voting in favor, plus the support of all seven Democratic senators. The bill then headed to the state House for consideration.
During the debate, Republican Sen. Dan Foreman said he “appreciated the intent but thought that the bill amounted to government overreach, which he saw as more harmful than the potential exposure to pornographic materials,” the Moscow-Pullman Daily News reported.
Foreman added that it is “up to parents” to decide whether or not to use filters for their children’s devices.
Some of the Republican senators expressed similar concerns about the government regulating the private sector, while others said anti-porn laws should not go after tech manufacturers but instead go after “the content creators themselves,” the newspaper reported.
Republican Sen. Scott Herndon opined, “I think there’s a disconnect between the problem and who we’re looking to hold accountable for the problem.”
Cook, who unsuccessfully tried to pass a similar bill in 2023, explained that “when he was a kid, pornography was usually distributed through magazines and it was behind a sealed bag as a barrier,” the Moscow-Pullman Daily News noted.
“What kind of barrier do we have on our mobile devices?” Cook asked his fellow senators.
Backing Cook and his bill, Republican Sen. Van Burtenshaw compared the porn filter mandate to other bills targeting supposed pornographic materials in libraries.
“If I was going to look at pornography, I wouldn’t go to the library, I would go on my cellphone,” Burtenshaw shared.
As XBIZ reported, the Idaho House is also currently considering the state’s copycat version of the age verification legislation being sponsored around the country by anti-porn religious conservative activists.
Speaking in support of the bill, main sponsor Rep. Elaine Price (R) said last month, “We have a constitutional duty to protect virtue and sobriety and promote temperance and morality.”
The language of “sobriety” and “temperance” has not been part of mainstream constitutional debate since the repeal of the 18th Amendment in 1933, after the complete failure of its blanket alcohol prohibition. Price's use of the terms appears to be an explicit reference to Article III, Section 24 of Idaho’s constitution, written in 1889, which reads, “The first concern of all good government is the virtue and sobriety of the people, and the purity of the home. The legislature should further all wise and well directed efforts for the promotion of temperance and morality.”