software filters is not narrowly tailored to further the
library's interest in protecting patrons from being unwillingly
exposed to offensive, sexually explicit material. As discussed
in our findings of fact, the filters required by CIPA block
substantial numbers of Web sites that even the most puritanical
public library patron would not find offensive, such as
http://federo.com, a Web site that promotes federalism in Uganda,
which N2H2 blocked as "Adults Only, Pornography," and
http://www.vvm.com/~bond/home.htm, a site for aspiring dentists,
which was blocked by Cyberpatrol as "Adult/Sexually Explicit."
We list many more such examples in our findings of fact, see
supra, and find that such erroneously blocked sites number in at
least the thousands.


Although we have found large amounts of overblocking, even
if only a small percentage of sites blocked are erroneously
blocked, either with respect to the state's interest in
preventing adults from viewing material that is obscene or child
pornography and in preventing minors from viewing material that
is harmful to minors, or with respect to the state's interest in
preventing library patrons generally from being unwillingly
exposed to offensive, sexually explicit material, this
imprecision is fatal under the First Amendment. Cf. Reno, 521
U.S. at 874 ("[T]he CDA lacks the precision that the First
Amendment requires when a statute regulates the content of
speech."); League of Women Voters, 468 U.S. at 398 ("[E]ven if
some of the hazards at which [the challenged provision] was aimed
are sufficiently substantial, the restriction is not crafted with
sufficient precision to remedy those dangers that may exist to