WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled June 29 that a law designed to protect minors from Internet pornography was probably overbroad and unconstitutional, but sent the case back to a lower court to rule on whether new technological advances would make enforcement of the law feasible.
In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled that a 1998 statute, which carried up to a $50,000 fine per day and jail time for anyone who exposed minors to harmful material online, threatened the First Amendment right to free speech if enforced.
“Content-based prohibitions, enforced by severe criminal penalties, have the constant potential to be a repressive force in the lives and thoughts of a free people,” wrote Justice Anthony M. Kennedy in the majority opinion of the court.
The Child Online Protection Act was signed into law by President Clinton, and President Bush has supported the law.
The American Civil Liberties Union and several other electronic communications groups, however, opposed the law, saying it could punish Web site publishers for posting sexual content that was legal for adults. Student media advocates were concerned that the law could punish members of student media organizations for publishing material deemed harmful to minors online, such as sex columns.
In the ruling, the court said a lower U.S. district court was right to block the law from being implemented.
“Today’s ruling from the court demonstrates that there are many less restrictive ways to protect children without sacrificing communication intended for adults,” according to a statement on the ACLU Web site. “By upholding the order stopping Attorney General Ashcroft from enforcing this questionable federal law, the court has made it safe for artists, sex educators and Web publishers to communicate with adults about sexuality without risking jail time.”
Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo spoke out against the ruling and said Department of Justice officials will continue to fight Internet predators.
“Our society has reached a broad consensus that child obscenity is harmful to our youngest generation and must be stopped,” Corallo said. “Congress has repeatedly attempted to address this serious need and the court yet again opposed these common-sense measures to protect America’s children.”
“The Parent’s Empowerment Act of 2004,” a related piece of legislation aimed at protecting children from obscenity published off- and online, was recently introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.
Read previous coverage
- High court revisits debate on law meant to shield minors from online porn News Flash, 3/3/2004
- Supreme Court will rehear case on Child Online Protection Act News Flash, 10/16/2003
- Supreme Court weighs online protection act The Report, Winter 2001-02
- Federal court blocks state Internet ban The Report, Winter 1999-2000
- Internet censorship battle rages on The Report, Spring 1999
- Judge halts enforcement of new federal Internet censorship law News Flash, 2/5/1999