WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 293

preventing minors from accessing obscenity on certain electronic devices with internet access.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Judy Aron and 6 co-sponsors

The bill aims to restrict minors’ access to obscene material on internet-enabled devices by requiring protective controls and monitoring in homes, schools, and similar settings.

Refer for Interim Study: MA VV 01/07/2026 HJ 1 P. 75
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 293

Summary of HB 293 (2026) – New Hampshire

Title: Preventing minors from accessing obscenity on certain electronic devices with internet access

Note: This summary is based on the bill’s title and the provided action history. Specific statutory text is not included in the prompt, so the summary focuses on the bill’s stated purpose, likely provisions, affected parties, and procedural timeline inferred from the actions.

1) Purpose and Intent

  • The bill aims to restrict minors from accessing obscenity on electronic devices that have internet access.
  • The overarching goal appears to be protecting minors from exposure to obscene material by regulating the use of internet-enabled devices by or in environments involving minors (e.g., households, schools, or other locations serving minors).

2) Key Provisions and Changes (Inferred)

While the exact statutory language is not provided, the bill’s title suggests the following typical policy elements in similar bills:

  • Prohibition or heightened restrictions on minors accessing obscene materials on internet-enabled devices.
  • Requirements or standards for devices (e.g., parental controls, content filters, or default privacy/security settings) to prevent access to obscene content.
  • Obligations for guardians, parents, schools, or institutions to implement protective measures, possibly including:
    • Use of approved filtering software on devices accessible to minors.
    • Education or awareness requirements for guardians about monitoring and controlling content.
  • Definitions:
    • Clarification of what constitutes “minors” (likely under 18) and “obscenity” (potentially aligning with state or federal legal standards or broad definitions).
    • Scope of devices covered (e.g., personal devices, school-provided devices, or any device with internet access).
  • Enforcement and penalties:
    • Possible civil or administrative penalties for non-compliance by guardians, institutions, or device providers.
    • Allocation of enforcement authority to a state agency or judiciary body.

3) Who/What Would Be Affected

  • Minors: Primary beneficiaries through restricted access to obscene material on internet-enabled devices.
  • Parents/Guardians: Potential obligations to implement controls and monitor usage.
  • Schools and Licensed Child-care/Youth Programs: Possible responsibilities to ensure devices used by minors have appropriate filtering and monitoring in place.
  • Device Providers/Technology Vendors: If the bill imposes requirements for default settings, filtering options, or reporting capabilities.
  • Law Enforcement and Regulatory Agencies: Enforce compliance and investigate violations.

4) Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Introduction and Referral:
    • Introduced in January 2025 and referred to Judiciary (as of 1/7/2025 action history).
  • Committee Process:
    • Various committee actions spanning 2025 and early 2026, including executive sessions, subcommittee work sessions, and a public hearing.
    • Notable workflow: Retained in committee (03/04/2025) and later “Refer for Interim Study” (11/19/2025). Interim study designation indicates the bill may be evaluated further before advancing to full legislative consideration.
  • Interim Study:
    • The bill was referred for interim study (as of 1/7/2026), suggesting a pause in final passage to study implications, costs, and potential impact.
  • Dates to Watch:
    • Any future committee votes, potential amendments, and hearings during the interim study period.
    • If the interim study findings are favorable, the bill could be reintroduced or amended for formal passage in a subsequent session.

5) Potential Impacts and Considerations

  • Public Safety and Youth Outcomes:
    • Potential reduction in minors’ exposure to obscene material online.
  • Privacy and Accessibility:
    • Balancing parental/school protections with individual privacy rights and reasonable access to information.
  • Compliance Costs:
    • Costs for guardians, schools, and device providers to implement and maintain filtering controls.
  • Equity Considerations:
    • Ensuring all families and schools, including underserved communities, have access to effective controls and supported options.
  • Technological Feasibility:
    • Effectiveness of filters and guardian controls across diverse devices and platforms.

6) Next Steps for Interested Readers

  • Monitor committee agendas and interim study reports for HB 293 to learn about potential amendments, cost implications, and final action.
  • Review the official text to understand definitions (e.g., “obscenity,” “minors,” and device scope) and specific duties or penalties.
  • If representing an affected entity (parent, school district, device vendor), prepare input on implementation challenges, privacy considerations, and funding needs.

If you’d like, I can refine this summary once the actual bill text is available, or tailor it to specific audiences (e.g., policymakers, school administrators, or parents).

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

Sign in to ask a question.