In response to today's federal court decision, which gave Backpage.com the injunction it wanted against enforcement of Washington State's new law to combat underage sex trafficking, Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna says:
Prostitution is illegal and child prostitution is particularly despicable. Kids advertised on Backpage, often runaways, don’t deserve to be victimized over and over, bought and sold like inanimate objects. Backpage says they work to prevent kids from being sold through their website, yet more than 150 cases of kids advertised there have been reported over the last three years. Meanwhile, Village Voice Media, which owns Backpage, reaps millions in annual profits from prostitution advertisements.
Rather than fight the selling of children through responsible business practices, Backpage has chosen to fight in our courts those who battle human trafficking. While they are entitled to do that, we will do all that is within our power to see that they fail. Promoting illegal acts such as child prostitution is not protected by federal law or the United States Constitution. We strongly disagree with today’s decision and will consult with lawmakers and county prosecutors about our options moving forward.
Here's Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles of Seattle, who pushed the bill through the state legislature:
Judge Martinez’s ruling today is very disappointing but proves it is time for Congress to reexamine the Federal Communications Decency Act and its application to websites that feature escort and adult content sections. The state of the Internet has changed dramatically since 1996, when the CDA was enacted by Congress. I also disagree that the Constitution provides protections for speech advertising illegal activity. There are many other details of Martinez’s ruling that need to be examined before further action. One thing remains clear — we must continue the war against sexual exploitation of children.
And here's King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg:
While we appreciate the Court’s careful consideration of Washington’s groundbreaking law, this is not the final decision on this matter. We will review our legal options with our colleagues in the Attorney General’s Office. We will also look to our congressional delegation for help in protecting children from being sexually exploited on the internet. Finally, we will continue to ask Backpage and other websites who knowingly profit from the sex trafficking of children to put in place real protections that significantly curtails the exploitation of these victims.
July 27, 2012
Judge Grants Internet Archive's Motion and Blocks Enforcement of New Washington Statute
Says Statute Likely Violates First Amendment, Federal Communications Decency Act
Seattle - Today, a federal district court judge granted a motion by the Internet Archive to block enforcement of an overbroad Washington state anti-sex trafficking statute that could make online service providers criminally liable for providing access to third parties' offensive materials.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is representing the Internet Archive in order to invalidate SB 6251, a law aimed at combatting advertisements for underage sex workers but with vague and overbroad language that is squarely in conflict with federal law. EFF last week appeared in federal district court in Seattle to argue that the court should grant a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the criminal statute while the lawsuit is ongoing. The court today agreed with the Internet Archive, finding that the statute likely violated the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments, the dormant Commerce Clause, and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
"We are grateful that the Court agreed with our concerns about the gravity of the structural problems with this statute," said Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. "While everyone involved in this case agrees that sex trafficking is an abhorrent practice, the approach used in this statute to combat the problem is fundamentally and irretrievably flawed. States cannot make those who provide access to online information -- like libraries or Internet Service Providers (ISPs) -- responsible for the illegal behavior of third party users, under threat of criminal penalties. Prosecuting criminals themselves will always be the better approach."
SB 6251 was passed with the hope of criminalizing the dissemination of underage sex trafficking ads and imposing a requirement to confirm the ages of individuals in such ads prior to publication. The law, however, is fraught with problems. As written, the vaguely-worded statute -- making it a felony to "directly or indirectly" provide access to any material that might constitute an "explicit or implicit" commercial offer for sex -- could be read to apply not only to posters but to neutral entities that provide access to online information, including ISPs, Internet cafes, and libraries. This would result in a chilling effect as such entities begin feeling pressured to censor protected online speech in order to safely stay on the right side of an unclear law. The Internet Archive is particularly concerned with any statute that seeks to make intermediaries responsible for content created by third parties -- the Internet Archive itself currently makes available over 150 billion archived web pages from 1996 to the present and has no practical ability to screen its collection for illegal content.
With the statute now enjoined, the plaintiffs (including Backpage.com, which has filed a separate complaint challenging the legality of the law) will now move for a final declaration by the court that the statute is illegal.
For the order granting preliminary injunction barring enforcement of SB 6251:
https://www.eff.org/node/71321
For more on this case:
https://www.eff.org/cases/internetarchiv…
Contacts:
Matt Zimmerman
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
mattz@eff.org
4
6
7
Comments (7) RSS