HB 254-PROHIBIT PORNOGRAPHY TO MINORS  1:43:57 PM CHAIR VANCE announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 254, "An Act relating to liability for publishing or distributing pornography to minors on the Internet." 1:44:20 PM The committee took an at-ease from 1:44 p.m. to 1:47 p.m. 1:47:21 PM CHAIR VANCE passed the gavel to Representative Carpenter. 1:47:49 PM CHAIR VANCE, prime sponsor, presented HB 254. She paraphrased the sponsor statement [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: House Bill 254 stands out as a crucial legislative initiative, addressing the growing public health crisis related to the influence of pornography on minors. It serves as a proactive measure to disrupt a tool employed by traffickers, preventing easy access to young would-be victims through explicit content. Recent years have witnessed an alarming exposure of minors to pornography, facilitated by advances in technology and the widespread availability of explicit content on the internet. This early exposure contributes to the hyper-sexualization of young minds, promoting bullying in schools and setting unreasonable self-expectations, necessitating urgent legislative action. House Bill 254 recognizes the disturbing connection between pornography and exploitation. It acknowledges that individuals involved in pornography may be victims of exploitation, blurring the line between consensual adult participation and sex trafficking. Some are forced into participating against their will, revealing a sinister aspect of the adult industry. The bill also addresses the link between the demand for pornography and the demand for commercial sex, including trafficking victims. The normalization of explicit content in society is argued to contribute to an increased demand for sexual services, perpetuating sex trafficking. Organized crime networks profit from both pornography and exploitation, utilizing explicit content as a lure to manipulate and control vulnerable individuals. One alarming aspect necessitating urgent legislative intervention is the role of pornography in the tactics employed by human traffickers. By restricting minors' access to explicit material, House Bill 254 serves as a crucial tool in the fight against human trafficking, contributing to the overall well-being and safety of the next generation. In conclusion, passing House Bill 254 is an urgent and necessary step in safeguarding the mental, emotional, and physical health of our youth. It reflects a collective responsibility to create a secure and nurturing environment, allowing minors to develop into healthy, well-adjusted individuals free from the corrosive influence of explicit material. CHAIR VANCE concluded that HB 254 would establish civil liability for the intentional publication or distribution of pornography without utilizing a commercially reasonable age verification method. In short, the bill would require age verification before accessing [pornography] websites. She said passing HB 265 is a crucial step towards safeguarding the mental, emotional, and physical health of [Alaska's] youth. 1:51:49 PM REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER cautioned the public that the committee's conversation may not be appropriate for all age groups. 1:52:19 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRAY shared his understanding that although [a similar] law passed in Texas, the courts blocked the legislation. He cited the reason for that decision, which quoted Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, and asked how Alaska would maneuver [if the courts were to strike down HB 265]. 1:53:25 PM BOB BALLINGER, Staff, Representative Sarah Vance, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Vance, prime sponsor of HB 265, pointed out that the Texas ruling was overturned, adding that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting children from pornography. REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked how the bill would prevent the use of virtual private networks (VPNs) to circumvent this law. CHAIR VANCE stated that the bill would not prevent the use of VPNs and that morality cannot be legislated. 1:55:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRAY shared his understanding that the third- party commercial software would require users to upload a government identification (ID), credit card information, or the use of facial recognition to verify age. He expressed concern that people who follow the law could be at risk of having their identities compromised. MR. BALLINGER said most of these websites require credit card information regardless. He added that the bill specifically prohibits websites from retaining the information used for identity verification. REPRESENTATIVE GRAY pointed out that Pornhub is free; furthermore, he stated that websites like X [formerly Twitter] and Reddit contain graphic pornography. He asked how the bill would restrict access to that. MR. BALLINGER explained that if a platform itself is not creating [the pornographic content] or purposefully providing it, then it would not be held liable. REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked whether the intent of the bill is to catch "bad guys" or prevent minors from viewing [pornographic] material. CHAIR VANCE explained that the bill would prevent minors from accessing pornography, and by doing so, act as another roadblock to prevent offenders [from accessing children]. REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER opened invited testimony. 2:02:43 PM RICHARD DARR, Executive Director, National Decency Coalition, gave invited testimony during the hearing on HB 254. He shared a quote from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and discussed similar legislation enacted in Louisiana, which resulted in an 80 percent decrease in access to Pornhub. In addition, he discussed the technology used in Louisiana that required a government ID and a biometric face scan. He stated that the bill would implement "base level" age verification in Alaska and could go further by empowering the enforcement arm of the state. 2:06:17 PM REPRESENTATIVE SUMNER asked whether platforms, like [X] or Instagram, could be considered publishers by engaging in in some level of content moderation. MR. BALLINGER directed attention to page 2, line 16, which provided a carveout for certain Internet platforms. He reiterated that if the platforms are not creating or distributing the pornography, they would not be held liable. REPRESENTATIVE SUMNER asked whether pornography websites would fall under this exemption. MR. BALLINGER answered no. REPRESENTATIVE SUMNER said he could see the carveout applying to Google as well and asked whether extensive content moderation would essentially place [the content] under control of the entity. MR. BALLINGER remarked, "If what you're doing is providing a platform, but you're not distributing it, you have no intent to do it, you're not controlling it to the point where you can police all that material, then you wouldn't be liable for it." 2:10:39 PM REPRESENTATIVE GROH requested further explanation of the carveout for news and journalism and asked whether this particular provision had been raised for litigation by other states. CHAIR VANCE shared that her intent is not to interfere with the free speech of journalists and to instead, target those who have purposefully made it their business to provide pornography. She deferred to Mr. Ballinger to speak to any litigation surrounding this issue. MR. BALLINGER did not know the answer. REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked Mr. Darr whether there would be any legal implications for this kind of legislation. MR. DARR said subsection (c) [on page 2, lines 8-10] features identical language to both the Utah and Louisiana bills. He added that the challenges brought against both the [Louisiana and Utah] bills were dismissed. 2:13:16 PM REPRESENTATIVE SUMNER asked which of the categories listed in subsection (d) [on page 2, lines 16-18] would capture Instagram or [X]. MR. BALLINGER suggested that they could be considered search engines. He offered to follow up with the requested information. REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER directed the question to Mr. Darr. MR. DARR shared his understanding that they could be considered a "provider." 2:15:57 PM CHAIR VANCE highlighted the qualifier on page 1, line 6, which indicated that a substantial portion of the platform's content must be pornography to require age verification. REPRESENTATIVE SUMNER opined that the ability to carry out significant and targeted moderation, while not moderating other content, would establish an intent to publish. 2:18:15 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRAY referenced a Washington Examiner Article that discusses a spike in VPN searches as pornography sites blocked access in Virginia. He noted that per the article, the same spike occurred in Utah before similar legislation was passed. He asked whether the bill sponsor would advise adults to use a VPN if they don't want to share their ID or credit cards. CHAIR VANCE said she would advise them not to view pornography and would not make a recommendation on how they can skirt the law. REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked whether it is against the law to use a VPN. CHAIR VANCE said not to her knowledge. REPRESENTATIVE GRAY conveyed the argument that "not all pornography is created equal." He suggested that in an attempt to circumvent the age verification, the bill might inadvertently lead minors to view illegal websites with worse content that may not implement the same standards as mainstream [pornography] websites. CHAIR VANCE said the same argument is made for the legalization of prostitution, adding that she highly disagreed. 2:21:47 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked whether the bill sponsor would outlaw pornography if she could. CHAIR VANCE acknowledged that pornography is protected by the First Amendment. She added that while pornography is inadvisable for anyone's health, she swore an oath to uphold the constitution. 2:22:42 PM REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER announced that HB 254 would be held over.