Law restricting sale of "sexually explicit" material overturned

A new state law that would have gone into effect Tuesday was overturned by a federal judge on Tuesday because of its unconstitutionality.\nThe law, which was struck down the same day it was intended to go into effect in Indiana, would have required any retailer who intended to sell material deemed “sexually explicit” to register with Indiana’s secretary of state, pay a fee and provide a list of all items for sale.\n“I feel great,” said Abbey Friedman, general coordinator of Boxcar Books, 310A S. Washington St. “I’m glad that the system works sometimes, and in this case.”\nBoxcar Books, along with Big Hat Books in Indianapolis and other plaintiffs, including other members of the entertainment industry, filed the suit in May. They claimed the law was not constitutional because it infringed on the First Amendment rights of the retailers.\nMany bookstore owners also feel the lack of specification of the law was its downfall.\n“It would have been devastating because of its vagueness,” said Christopher Finan, president of the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, who were one of the plaintiffs. “It would have certainly forced many booksellers to discontinue the sale of books and magazines and other materials that people have the constitutional right to purchase. It would have been a very dark day indeed.”\nTechnically, because the ruling came the same day the law was supposed to go into effect, it had actually been effective for about 15 hours before it was overturned, Friedman said.\n“I was a little bit nervous and e-mailed (our attorney) this morning when I got in,” she said. “He said let’s just wait it out a little more, and it worked.” \nThe defendants in the case have 30 days to appeal the ruling, said Kenneth Falk, the lawyer who represented three of the plaintiffs, including Boxcar Books. Friedman said the defendants had attempted to negotiate with the plaintiffs during the case.\n“They were trying to bargain with us about three weeks ago to see if we would want to rewrite the law for them,” she said. “I think they felt pretty threatened at that point. I’m kind of under the impression that they’ll leave it alone.”\nFinan also hopes this is the end of the case for the booksellers.\n“Although we were never in any serious doubt about the statute, we’re certainly glad the judge agrees,” he said. “We’re pleased she’s made short work of this very bad law.\n“We hope that the state will acknowledge the judge’s opinion in great detail and decide not to appeal and make the best of a bad situation.”