sexual identity, testified that she would have been unwilling as
a young teen to ask a librarian to disable filtering software so
that she could view materials concerning gay and lesbian
issues. Similarly, plaintiff Mark Brown stated that he would
have been too embarrassed to ask a librarian to disable filtering
software if it had impeded his ability to research surgery
options for his mother when she was treated for breast cancer.
As explained in our findings of fact, see supra at Subsection
II.D.2.b, the reluctance of patrons to request permission to
access Web sites that were erroneously blocked is further
established by the low number of patron unblocking requests,
relative to the number of erroneously blocked Web sites, in those
public libraries that use software filters and permit patrons to
request access to incorrectly blocked Web sites. Cf. Fabulous
Assocs., 896 F.2d at 786 ("On the record before us, there is more
than enough evidence to support the district court's finding that
access codes will chill the exercise of some users' right to hear
protected communications.").
To be sure, the government demonstrated that it is possible
for libraries to permit patrons to request anonymously that a
particular Web site be unblocked. In particular, the Tacoma
Public Library has configured its computers to present patrons
with the option, each time the software filter blocks their
access to a Web page, of sending an anonymous email to library
staff requesting that the page be unblocked. Moreover, a library
staff member periodically scans logs of URLs blocked by the
filters, in an effort to identify erroneously blocked sites,
which the library will subsequently unblock. Although a public
library's ability to permit anonymous unblocking requests
addresses the deterrent effect of requiring patrons to identify