WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SF 347

Phoenix Correspondence Commission appropriation

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Cal Bahr

Strengthens enforcement against distributing obscene material to minors in libraries by allowing civil actions, injunctions, and substantial penalties on violators and their employ

Referred to State and Local Government
#commissions #government-state
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 347

Summary of Minnesota Senate File (SF) 347 – Phoenix Correspondence Commission appropriation (Introduced February 18, 2025)

Note on scope: The bill’s title references an appropriation for a “Phoenix Correspondence Commission,” but the text provided focuses on civil remedies and enforcement related to obscenity in public libraries. The summary below reflects the provisions as introduced.

Purpose and intent

  • To strengthen enforcement against the distribution or exhibition of obscene material and hard‑core pornography to minors in public libraries.
  • To authorize civil actions and injunctive relief by local and state authorities, and to impose substantial penalties for continued violations.
  • To authorize damages to be awarded to plaintiffs (parents/guardians) in certain civil actions and to enable counties and the state to intervene when obscene material is disseminated to minors.

Key provisions and changes

  • Civil action by a parent/guardian:

    • If a librarian employed by a municipal entity continues to violate an injunction prohibiting obscene material or hard‑core pornography being provided to a minor, the parent/guardian who was the prevailing party may sue the municipal entity that employs the librarian.
    • If the parent/guardian prevails, the court must award actual damages for injuries resulting from the librarian’s initial violation and for any subsequent injunction violation.

  • Penalties for ongoing violations:

    • A civil penalty of at least $20,000, plus $1,000 for each day the librarian’s violation of the injunction continues.

  • Authority to pursue injunctions:

    • Code section 728.6 authorizes a county attorney to institute civil proceedings to enjoin the dissemination or exhibition of obscene material to minors when there is reasonable cause to believe such material is being disseminated or planned within the county.
    • The Attorney General is authorized to institute similar civil proceedings.

  • Probable cause standard:

    • A county attorney’s or the Attorney General’s receipt of a copy of the court’s injunctive order (and subsequent information that a violation continues) constitutes probable cause that a violation has occurred.

Who is affected

  • Librarians employed by municipal entities and the entities themselves (potential civil liability for injunction violations).
  • Parents/guardians of minors (standing to sue and seek damages).
  • County attorneys and the Attorney General (enforcement of injunctions and civil actions).
  • Public libraries and related governmental units serving minors.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduction and referrals:
    • Introduced: February 18, 2025.
    • Referred to State and Local Government (and later to a subcommittee for consideration: Driscoll, Webster, and Weiner).
  • Legislative actions:
    • January 21, 2025: Introduction and first reading.
    • February 18, 2025: Introduced and referred to Local Government.
    • February 20, 2025: Subcommittee action noted.
  • Legislative status:
    • Subcommittee stage referenced; no final passage status provided in the excerpt.
  • Fiscal notes:
    • No explicit appropriation amount or fiscal details are provided within the text excerpt. The title mentions appropriation, but the body focuses on civil processes and penalties.

Related bills

  • Companion: HF 816.

Potential impact

  • Increased financial risk for municipal employers of librarians who violate injunctions.
  • Stronger incentives for public libraries to ensure compliance with prohibitions on distributing obscene material to minors.
  • Expanded capacity for counties and the state to pursue civil actions and injunctions against violators.
  • Significant penalties could act as a deterrent, particularly for repeated violations.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.