Sex Offender Registries, Sex Offenders Search, News, Info and Discussion

  
Home | Sex Offender Registry | Megan's Law | Forums (Message Boards) | News Archive
AMBER Alert | Law Enforcement Agencies | Directory of Sites | Polls | Library | Glossary | More Resources                             Login | About Us

Top Posters Since October 2003
dp14000+
orolan4000+
Navigatr12500+
Silvert...2500+
1dadof52500+
Valerie2000+
steve1500+
victori...1000+
myoung1000+
rabbitr...750+
HPierce750+
poetsdr...750+
Renunci...750+
lj750+
fallenone500+
DoTheCr...500+
marta500+
momhelp...500+
prozac500+
rebel51500+
PVulcan250+
anti250+
rodsmith250+
LockEmUp250+
Quest250+
artie250+
KK250+
LostTime250+
TGoodman250+
amberleaf250+
deadmom...250+
brennus100+
scarlett100+
mousein...100+
thepar100+
assumpt...100+
lildrafire100+
JakeLF100+
MrTruth100+
june5100+

Newest Users
Registered within the last 72 hours.
ojaesk
prboukni
wchavez1112

Forum: Old Message Board

Thread (Discussion): supremes to hear 'net porn law

Switch to Flat View

In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user.

Message 118217
supremes to hear 'net porn law


Posted by x_simon on Oct 14, 2003 12:29 PM | Also by x_simon
Gender: , Age Bracket: , State: , Country:
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=KPPKJAS4QSKIACRBAELCFFA?type
=internetNews&storyID=3610996


Internet Porn Law to Be Decided by Supreme Court
Tue October 14, 2003 11:00 AM ET
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court said on Tuesday it would decide whether a law aimed at protecting minors from Internet pornography violated constitutional free-speech rights.

The high court agreed to hear a Justice Department appeal defending the law in a case that has pitted free-speech rights against the efforts by Congress to regulate cyberspace by keeping minors away from online pornography.

The Child Online Protection Act required Web site operators to make Internet viewers use credit cards or adult access systems before they could see material deemed harmful to minors. Violators faced up to six months in prison and fines.

The 1998 law has never been enforced. It was challenged on First Amendment grounds by the American Civil Liberties Union, online magazine publishers, booksellers and others, and the courts have blocked the government from enforcing the law.

It will be the second time the Supreme Court has considered the law. The justices in 2002 sent the case back to a U.S. appeals court in Philadelphia without deciding the free-speech issues at the heart of the law.

Congress came up with the law in another effort to regulate access by minors to Internet pornography after the Supreme Court in 1997 struck down on free-speech grounds the Communications Decency Act.

The case now before the Supreme Court stemmed from an appeals court ruling that declared the law unconstitutional.

The appeals court ruled the law would require Web site operators to engage in self-censorship, restricting lawful speech for adults, to avoid criminal prosecution. It held the law was too broad and too vague.

FILTERING SOFTWARE

The appeals court said the screening methods, including requiring Web-page viewers to give a credit card number, would unfairly require adults to identify themselves before they can see constitutionally protected material such as medical sites offering sex advice.

It concluded filtering software would be a less restrictive alternative to prevent access by minors to harmful material.

In appealing, Solicitor General Theodore Olson of the Justice Department said the ruling "leaves minors unprotected from the harmful effects of the enormous amount of pornography on the World Wide Web."

He said the law had been modeled after "state laws that require local stores to place pornographic material that is harmful to minors behind blinder racks, in sealed wrappers or in opaque covers."

Olson described the use of a valid credit card or an adult identification system as a "reasonable burden ... to serve the compelling interest in protecting minors from pornography."

Ann Beeson of the American Civil Liberties Union urged the high court to reject the government's appeal.

The law would suppress a large amount of speech that adults have a constitutional right to communicate and receive online, she said, adding that the law would cover popular Web-based chat rooms and discussion boards on sexual topics.

Beeson said federal courts have struck down seven state laws that were nearly identical to the federal one.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case early next year, with a decision due by the end of June.

See an abbreviation or acronym, but don't know what it stands for? Consult the Glossary.

Thread


118217, x_simon, Oct 14, 2003 12:29 PM [supremes to hear 'net porn law]
      118230, x_orolan, Oct 14, 2003 03:11 PM [Re: supremes to hear 'net porn law]
            118232, x_Silverthorne, Oct 14, 2003 03:38 PM [Re: supremes to hear 'net porn law]
                  118244, x_orolan, Oct 14, 2003 07:10 PM [Re: supremes to hear 'net porn law]
                        118251, x_marta, Oct 14, 2003 08:35 PM [Re: supremes to hear 'net porn law]
                              118274, x_orolan, Oct 15, 2003 10:31 AM [Re: supremes to hear 'net porn law]
                                    118290, x_marta, Oct 15, 2003 07:59 PM [Re: supremes to hear 'net porn...]
Forum Home | Top of Thread
Tell a Friend about this page.
Copyright 1998-2007 SexCriminals.com and Befriend | About Site | Credits | Contact Us