Published: May 07, 2008 04:53 pm      

ACLU suit targets new Ind. law on sexually explicit material

The Indianapolis Museum of Art is teaming with bookstores, publishers and the ACLU of Indiana to sue over a new law that will require retailers to register with the state and pay a fee if they want to sell sexually explicit material.

Their complaint names every county prosecutor in Indiana and aims to stop the law from going into effect July 1. The law calls for retailers to register with the Indiana secretary of state.

State Rep. Terry Goodin, D-Crothersville, wrote the law to stop companies from deceiving communities with weak zoning laws to set up pornography stores. But the plaintiffs worry that it's too loosely defined and could crimp First Amendment rights, which include free speech and freedom of the press.

"We're talking about a law that has very broad and very vague and — we would contend — very unconstitutional restrictions and burdens," said Ken Falk, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana. "To the best of my knowledge, there is no similar law in the United States."

Goodin points to pornography vendors that pop up along interstate exits as the impetus for the law, which passed through the Indiana General Assembly earlier this year. He said a company told one southern Indiana community along Interstate 65 it planned to operate a truck stop gas station but then opened a porn store.

"Those folks are being deceived by these companies that are coming in. It's just not fair," Goodin said.

He noted that the law doesn't stop a business from selling pornography. It just requires the retailer to declare its intention to the community.

"This is all about local control, and giving those people at the local level the opportunity to decide whether they want those types of businesses in their area," he said.

If the law targets those businesses, then it should be written more narrowly to reflect that, said Maxwell Anderson, the art museum's CEO. The museum store sells art history books, and he noted that nudity plays a prominent role in the history of creativity.

"We don't want to start having to examine our book store and think about contents of our shelves in the way that this law requires," he said.

The lawsuit also cites another plaintiff, the Indianapolis store Big Hat Books, as an example of a business that could be harmed. It sells no material defined as obscene under state law, but it does sell literature with content that might be deemed harmful to minors.

It also earns more than half its revenue from children's literature, and that business may dissolve if the independent book store is "labeled as a purveyor of sexually explicit materials," the complaint states.

But Goodin said court rulings have shown there's no gray area when it comes to defining pornography.

"Individuals, corporations, companies know whether or not they're selling pornography," he said. "There's no question about that."

The notion that the law infringes on First Amendment rights is "absolutely ridiculous," he said.

"I think the folks who feel this way are being deceived by the pornography industry," he said. "It's unfortunate."

The lawsuit was filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. Other plaintiffs named include the Association of American Publishers Inc. and the National Association of Recording Merchandisers.