Sacramento Library Board To Vote this Week on Internet Porn Policy

Sacramento, CA – The Sacramento Public Library Authority Board is expected to vote this week on whether it will change its internet use policy to allow greater access to pornography. The Board considered the issue last month but did not take action. The ACLU has claimed it would be unconstitutional for the Board to limit access to porn in public libraries. Even library staff are urging the Board to only disallow activities that are already illegal, such as the viewing of child pornography.

Attorneys for Pacific Justice Institute disagree. Matthew McReynolds, a PJI staff attorney who has previously urged the Board to strengthen its policy, stated, “This issue boils down to protecting kids and using public resources responsibly. Inviting sexual predators into libraries by providing free access to pornography has proven tragic for kids in San Francisco, Chicago, Atlanta, and many other cities. We cannot let that happen in Sacramento. Benjamin Franklin would be rolling over in his grave if he knew that ‘free speech’ was being used to justify turning libraries into adult entertainment venues.”

The Library Board will consider and is expected to take decisive action on its internet use policy at its public meeting this Thursday, April 24, in the chambers of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, 700 H Street. The meeting begins at 3:00 p.m. Pacific Justice Institute is encouraging local parents and taxpayers to attend the meeting and urge the Board to ensure that local libraries are safe for kids by banning the viewing of internet porn. Members of the media are also invited to attend, as prior meetings have generated lively public debate. Comments may also be sent to the Board via Brenda Haggard, bhaggard@saclibrary.org

Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute, commented, “The notion that taxpayers must subsidize the viewing of internet porn is absurd. Libraries should be safe havens for learning, not magnets for sex addicts. The Library Board should be more concerned about potential liability from failing to adequately protect innocent children than from failing to please the ACLU.”