JEFFERSON CITY — New measures intended to prevent kids from seeing porn on the internet were presented this week by a group of state lawmakers during a House committee hearing.
The four proposals take varied approaches to requiring porn sites to verify the age of all visitors and imposing civil liability on the site owners and operators if minors access pornographic content.
The bills also vary in how they define that content, though they all use the term “material harmful to minors” and draw on the U.S. Supreme Court’s “.”
The Miller test, a set of guidelines based on a 1973 ruling, is a way for courts to determine if something is “obscene” and therefore not protected under the First Amendment.
People are also reading…
Lawmakers and those who offered public testimony raised competing and contentious concerns about protecting children online, the effects of porn, privacy, and free speech.

“My bill is designed to protect minors from online pornography,” said Rep. , R-Belton, one of the bill sponsors. She later said that porn sites resist age verification “because they know that minors can be hooked on their products at an early age.”
Gallick said studies show porn harms brain development, causes health problems and addiction, can be “a conduit to pregnancy” and can “encourage sexual promiscuity.”
Gallick said Vicky Hartzler, a former state representative and Missouri congresswoman, contacted her last summer to see if she knew someone willing to sponsor legislation related to minors and pornography, and she agreed.
Hartzler spoke at the hearing, saying Gallick’s bill will “protect our children from what I view as a public health crisis that is not just endangering the public at large but also harming our children — and that is the epidemic of pornography.”
“We must protect our children from exposure to this harmful, dangerous, and, I would say, evil influence,” she said.
Rep. , R-St. Clair, is sponsoring another proposal. He said his bill mirrors that of Virginia state Sen. Bill Stanley, was signed into law last year and led to the Pornhub blocking Virginia users from its website.
The proposal simply allows Missourians to file civil lawsuits if minors access online porn, Banderman said. “We’re not arresting people, we’re not locking people up.”
Age verification would be done using an ID, through an identity verification business or through a “commercially available database that is regularly used by businesses or governmental entities.”
“Your requirement that any folks that are of legal age that want to access this material have to provide not only identification but subject themselves to a lack of anonymity is a very heavy-handed approach,” said Rep. , R-O’Fallon, who is on the committee that heard the proposals.
“We’re effectively allowing the creation of databases of folks that use pornography,” he said.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri opposed the proposals.
“While the ACLU of Missouri is understanding of the overarching intention to increase safety online, these proposed measures raise serious concerns regarding privacy, surveillance, and First Amendment rights of Missourians,” it said in written testimony.
TechNet, a tech industry lobbying group, in written testimony asked state lawmakers to change their proposals to more closely align with a .
“Without amendments, bills on this issue area can have the unintended consequences of platforms having to decide to ban entire categories of users and content for fear of being found liable under the application of overly broad language,” Technet’s statement said.
This legislation is House Bills 19932655 2157.
Missouri's Legislature reflects the federal structure in many ways. Video by Beth O'Malley