A new Maine law seeking to protect minors from predatory marketing could turn out to be more restrictive than anyone intended.

The original goal of the law was to block the collection of minors’ health-related information for marketing purposes ”“ a narrow but well-intentioned goal. Then it occurred to legislators to block the collection of any personal information about young people, including their names, without express parental permission.

This might also seem entirely reasonable, but it potentially establishes severe penalties for legal and well-established practices. Maine colleges, newspapers and data-gathering organizations are asking a federal court to set aside the new law.

Newspapers fear that the law, scheduled to go into effect Sept. 12, would make it risky to publish honor rolls, high school graduation stories and profiles of student athletes ”“ information that most parents and students are happy to see in print.

Maine colleges are concerned that the law will interfere with communication between college admissions staff and high school guidance departments.

The law prohibits anyone from collecting minors’ names, addresses and other data for marketing purposes without first getting their parents’ permission. Violators of these restrictions could face lawsuits and state fines of up to $20,000 per offense. Such penalties are likely to make editors think twice about reporting on student accomplishments, and school officials pause before releasing such information.

It’s unlikely that anyone believes this would be a good idea. News items noting the accomplishments of students are enjoyed by readers ad welcomed by school administrators. Recognition also pleases most young people.

Maine’s predatory marketing law is designed to clamp down on inappropriate practices. Newspapers and colleges ”“ like most organizations ”“ do a lot of marketing. But there is nothing to be feared from the businesses advertising on sports pages, or the college brochures promoting campus attractions and academic programs that come to high school students in the mail.

The sponsor of the legislation appears willing to concede that there may be unintended consequences, though she correctly points out that no one raised these warnings during legislative hearings. But legislators should take greater care before enacting restrictive rules on commerce. Last year the Supreme Court struck down a Maine law that put an unfair burden on delivery services in trying to block Internet sales of cigarettes to minors.

Now, unfortunately, it’s again up to a court to decide whether Maine’s legislative zeal has gone too far.

— Questions? Comments? Contact Kristen Schulze Muszynski or Nick Cowenhoven at 282-1535 or kristenm@journaltribune.com or nickc@journaltribune.com.