In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Alexandria Division
Mainstream Loudoun, et. al., )
Plaintiffs, ))
v. ) Civil Action No. 97-
2049-A ________________________ ))
Board of Trustees of the )
Loudoun County Library, ))
Defendant. )
Memorandum Opinion
Background
At issue in this civil action is whether a public library may enact a policy prohibiting the
access of library patrons to certain content-based categories of Internet publications.
Plaintiffs are a Loudoun County non-profit organization, suing on its own behalf and on
behalf of its members, and individual Loudoun County residents who claim to have had
their access to Internet sites blocked by the defendant library board's Internet policy.
They, along with plaintiff-intervenors ("intervenors"), individuals and other entities who
claim that defendant's Internet policy has blocked their websites or other materials they
placed on the Internet, allege that this policy infringes their right to free speech under the
First Amendment. Defendant, the Board of Trustees of the Loudoun County Library,
contends that a public library has an absolute right to limit what it provides to the public
and that any restrictions on Internet access do not implicate the First Amendment.
The background of this action is fully summarized in this Court's April 7, 1998 and will
not be repeated in depth here. On October 20, 1997, defendant passed a "Policy on
Internet Sexual Harassment" ("Policy") stating that the Loudoun County public libraries
would provide Internet access to its patrons subject to the following restrictions: (1) the
library would not provide e-mail, chat rooms, or pornography; (2) all library computers
would be equipped with site-blocking software to block all sites displaying: (a) child
pornography and obscene material;1 and (b) material deemed harmful to juveniles; (3) all
library computers would be installed near and in full view of library staff; and (4) patrons
would not be permitted to access pornography and, if they do so and refuse to stop, the
police may be called to intervene. See Pls. Ex. 1. It is the second restriction in the Policy
that lies at the heart of this action.
To effectuate the second restriction, the library has purchased X-Stop, commercial site-
blocking software manufactured by Log-On Data Corporation. While the method by
which X-Stop chooses sites to block has been kept secret by its developers, see Pls. Ex.
16, Dep[osition]. of Michael S. Bradshaw ("Bradshaw Dep.") at 12-13, it is undisputed
SNIPPETS:
In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia Alexandria Division
At issue in this civil action is whether a public library may enact a policy prohibiting the
Plaintiffs are a Loudoun County non-profit organization, suing on its own behalf and on
They, along with plaintiff-intervenors, individuals and other entities who claim that
Defendant, the Board of Trustees of the Loudoun County Library, contends that a public
Plaintiffs and intervenors both allege that the Policy, as written and as implemented,
In the motions now before the Court, plaintiffs, intervenors, and defendant each ask the
Specifically, intervenors would substitute Christopher Filkins for The Safer Sex Page, John
defendant alleges it would be prejudiced by adding these individuals as named intervenors at
we decline to reconsider our earlier ruling on this issue.
Plaintiffs and intervenors respond that defendant has misread Kreimer and moreover that the
These are "places which by long tradition or by government fiat have been devoted to assembly
The last category is the non-public forum, such as a government office building or a
It is undisputed that the Loudoun County libraries have not traditionally been open to the
Defendant contends that the Policy is designed to combat two secondary effects: creating a
Prior Restraint Plaintiffs and intervenors allege that even if the Policy were to survive
"any restraint prior to judicial review can be imposed only for a specific brief period
|
