Editing Internet filter (section)

===United States===
The use of Internet filters or content-control software varies widely in public libraries in the United States, since Internet use policies are established by the local library board. Many libraries adopted Internet filters after Congress conditioned the receipt of universal service discounts on the use of Internet filters through the [[Children's Internet Protection Act]] (CIPA). Other libraries do not install content control software, believing that acceptable use policies and educational efforts address the issue of children accessing [[age-inappropriate]] content while preserving adult users' right to freely access information. Some libraries use Internet filters on computers used by children only. Some libraries that employ content-control software allow the software to be deactivated on a case-by-case basis on application to a librarian; libraries that are subject to CIPA are required to have a policy that allows adults to request that the filter be disabled without having to explain the reason for their request.

Many legal scholars believe that a number of legal cases, in particular ''[[Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union]]'', established that the use of content-control software in libraries is a violation of the First Amendment.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.spectacle.org/cs/library.bak|title=Purchase of blocking software by public libraries is unconstitutional|last=Wallace|first=Jonathan D.|date=November 9, 1997}}</ref> The Children's Internet Protection Act [CIPA] and the June 2003 case ''[[United States v. American Library Association]]'' found CIPA constitutional as a condition placed on the receipt of federal funding, stating that First Amendment concerns were dispelled by the law's provision that allowed adult library users to have the filtering software disabled, without having to explain the reasons for their request. The plurality decision left open a future "as-applied" Constitutional challenge, however.

In November 2006, a lawsuit was filed against the North Central Regional Library District (NCRL) in Washington State for its policy of refusing to disable restrictions upon requests of adult patrons, but CIPA was not challenged in that matter.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.aclu-wa.org/detail.cfm?id=557|title=ACLU Suit Seeks Access to Information on Internet for Library Patrons|website=ACLU of Washington|date=November 16, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061205220253/http://www.aclu-wa.org/detail.cfm?id=557|archive-date=December 5, 2006|url-status=dead}}</ref> In May 2010, the Washington State Supreme Court provided an opinion after it was asked to certify a question referred by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington: "Whether a public library, consistent with Article I, § 5 of the Washington Constitution, may filter Internet access for all patrons without disabling Web sites containing constitutionally-protected speech upon the request of an adult library patron." The Washington State Supreme Court ruled that NCRL's internet filtering policy did not violate Article I, Section 5 of the Washington State Constitution. The Court said: "It appears to us that NCRL's filtering policy is reasonable and accords with its mission and these policies and is viewpoint neutral. It appears that no article I, section 5 content-based violation exists in this case. NCRL's essential mission is to promote reading and lifelong learning. As NCRL maintains, it is reasonable to impose restrictions on Internet access in order to maintain an environment that is conducive to study and contemplative thought." The case returned to federal court.

In March 2007, Virginia passed a law similar to CIPA that requires public libraries receiving state funds to use content-control software. Like CIPA, the law requires libraries to disable filters for an adult library user when requested to do so by the user.<ref>{{cite news|first=Michael|last=Sluss|title=Kaine signs library bill: The legislation requires public libraries to block obscene material with Internet filters|url=http://www.roanoke.com/politics/wb/wb/xp-109919|newspaper=The Roanoke Times|date=March 23, 2007|access-date=March 24, 2007|archive-date=February 29, 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120229022017/http://www.roanoke.com/politics/wb/wb/xp-109919|url-status=dead}}</ref>