A recent hearing in the Minnesota House Commerce Committee sparked a firestorm of controversy over a bill intended to regulate online content. Representative Leigh Finke voiced a stark warning: the legislation’s language, she argued, could inadvertently block access to vital educational resources for LGBTQ+ youth.
Finke expressed deep concern that aggressively enforced age-verification laws – similar to one recently affirmed by the Supreme Court in Texas – might be weaponized to restrict information deemed beneficial to young people exploring their identities. She suggested some legal officials appeared eager to utilize these laws to limit access to materials that could be considered educational for queer individuals.
The representative warned that broadly defined terms like “prurient interest” could be dangerously expanded, potentially classifying even information about the existence and experiences of transgender children as sexually explicit content. This, she argued, would create a chilling effect on access to crucial support and understanding.
A clip of Finke’s remarks quickly circulated online, particularly on platforms like Facebook, where groups like Moms for Liberty and the Stanley M. Herzog Foundation accused her of opposing sensible age verification measures. They alleged she prioritized access to pornography for LGBTQ+ youth over child protection.
The response on platforms like X and Reddit was overwhelmingly negative, with many users leveling harsh accusations. Terms like “disgusting” and “grooming” were frequently used, and some even labeled Finke a “child predator,” demanding her resignation or vowing to use the video against her in future elections.
Finke responded by stating her willingness to collaborate with the bill’s author, while also asserting that her comments had been deliberately taken out of context and twisted to inflict harm due to her transgender identity. She reaffirmed her commitment to advocating for LGBTQ+ youth.
Her central argument remains that HF 1434 can be refined to effectively shield minors from harmful pornography without simultaneously becoming a tool for discrimination or censorship. She fears the bill, as currently written, could fuel a “machine” dedicated to targeting and dismantling the transgender community.
