William C. Odle, Thursday, February 16, 2012 | Filed under: First Amendment
A federal district court in ruled yesterday that a Missouri school district must stop blocking web content geared toward the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) communities through use of its network filtering software. In Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays Inc. v. Camdenton R-III School District, plaintiffs claimed that the school district "implemented internet filtering software that systematically blocks websites expressing a positive viewpoint toward LGBT individuals, in violation of PFLAG's freedom of expression under the First Amendment." The software permits users to block internet content by content categories, such as pornography, advertising, and “sexuality.” The sexuality category automatically blocked sites offering LGBT-positive information, including those maintained by PFLAG and others, which plaintiffs alleged constituted unlawful viewpoint discrimination. The school district argued that the filtering software was necessary in order to comply with Children's Internet Protection Act's (“CIPA”) 47 U.S.C. § 254(h)(6)(B)(i), a federal statute requiring schools to protect children using school computers from viewing visual depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or harmful to minors.
The court was not persuaded, finding that the school district intentionally discriminatied against plaintiffs based on their viewpoint, largely because the district continued using what the court deemed a substandard content filter, URL Blacklist, depsite plaintiffs' objections and complaints from the ACLU. The court noted that URL Blacklist automatically categorized any LGBT friendly site under the block category of "sexuality," while allowing access to anti-LGBT sites which it categorized as "religious." The court found that the content blocker amounted to a "blunt instrument" that "systematically targets the highest-quality informational sites that express a positive viewpoint toward LGBT individuals," while actually failing to block up to 30% of CIPI prohibited sites. The court also concluded that other filtering systems are available that "are much more effective" at filtering out pornography "and do so without burdening websites that express a positive viewpoint toward LGBT individuals." In addition, the court rejected the district's argument that allowing students to request that sites be unblocked did not remedy the issue, because such requests were "not truly anonymous," and a cumbersome procedure could deter students seeking access to the gay-positive sites. "Students may be deterred from accessing websites expressing a positive view toward LGBT individuals either by the inconvenience of having to wait 24 hours for access or by the stigma of knowing that viewpoint has been singled out as less worthy by the school district and the community," the judge said.