Court Agrees, Online Content Law Is Unconstitutional
Posted on: Wednesday, 23 July 2008, 09:20 CDT
On Tuesday, a federal appeals court struck down a 1998 law proposed to protect children from sexual and objectionable material on the Internet calling the law unconstitutional.
The verdict by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia is the newest turn in legal battle over the Child Online Protection Act that has lasted nearly 10 years. The battle has reached the Supreme Court once before and could be going back.
The proposed law would keep Web sites from making questionable content accessible to minors via the Internet. The law was passed a year after a Supreme Court ruling which deemed the Communication Decency Act, another law proposed to protect children from explicit material, unconstitutional in the Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) case.
The ACLU fought the 1998 law for publisher Salon Media Group, and an alliance of artists, writers, and health educators.
Attorney Chris Hansen, of the ACLU, argued that lawmakers were trying to restrict free speech on the Internet more than in print mediums, and said, “the rules should be the same.”
According to John Morris, general counsel for the Center for Democracy & Technology, the Child Online Protection Act would have forced all Web sites to carry only family-friendly content because of the impossibility to keep children out of sites that are lawful for adults. Morris’ group also filed briefs against the law.
The ruling on Tuesday concluded that the Child Online Protection Act is unconstitutionally vague and broad. The federal appeals court also said the law violates the First Amendment because parental control tools offer a less restrictive way to protect children from questionable material online.
Morris agreed, and added that filters also provide protection from sites overseas that offer questionable material, but are not under U.S. law.
The Justice Department said it would evaluate the ruling before taking further steps.
"We are disappointed that the court of appeals struck down a congressional statute designed to protect our children from exposure to sexually explicit materials on the Internet," said Charles Miller, department spokesman.
If the case returns to the Supreme Court, it would be the second time justices has evaluated the Child Online Protection Act. In 2004, the Supreme Court upheld a ruling saying the law violated the First Amendment. The court sent the case back to the district court to verify whether changes in restriction software could affect the laws constitutionality.
---
On the Net:
Source: redOrbit Staff & Wire Reports
Related Articles
- Attorney General Reminds Home Improvement Contractors to Register; Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act Goes Into Effect July 1
- eBay Voices Strong Support for 'The Discount Pricing Consumer Protection Act, S.148' at Senate Hearing Today
- Democratic Leaders Voice Unanimous Support on 10th Anniversary of Landmark Marine Protection Act
- Yoursphere Call to Action - Help Protect Our Children
- DISH Network Statement in Response to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Ruling in EchoStar Vs. NDS Group
- New Survey Reveals That the Pension Protection Act Significantly Impacts Retirement Plans for Healthcare Sector
- ACLJ Represents Members of Congress in Urging Supreme Court to Uphold Constitutionality of Child Pornography Law
- National Coalition for Protection of Children and Families Summiton Advanced Technology Held in Washington
- UNICEF Launches Campaign to Protect Nigerian Children Against AIDS
- Baby Doe Redux? The Department of Health and Human Services and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002: A Cautionary Note on Normative Neonatal Practice
 |
 |
User Comments (0)
RSS Feeds