Join 3,557 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


In an 8-1 ruling with Justice Stevens dissenting,
May 13, 2002 10:32 AM   Subscribe

In an 8-1 ruling with Justice Stevens dissenting, the U.S. Supreme Court has partially upheld the Child Online Protection Act against objections that by relying on community standards it was unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the First Amendment. COPA is the 1998 federal law making it illegal to make pornography available to children on the Internet. Passed in the wake of the Court's 1997 ruling striking down the Communications Decency Act but never enforced because of various court injunctions, COPA is still undergoing other lower-court challenges whose merits today's ruling does not address.
posted by tiny pea (4 comments total)

 
Perhaps the Pope will intervene on behalf of priests all over the US?
posted by nofundy at 11:44 AM on May 13, 2002


This writeup isn't really what NPR is saying about it. They had a pretty long report on the non-ruling during All Things Considered today (not online till later tonight) and their take was that the decision is massively confused, and doesn't decide anything. Quotes from Lessig, the ACLU lawyer, and one of the people behind the bill.

8-1 is, I think, overstating it by a long way. There were four different opinions, and what actually happened was that the Supremes upheld the bar on enforcement, and kicked it back to the lower courts for "further considerations of constitutional issues."
posted by rusty at 2:49 PM on May 13, 2002


The Supreme Court has become a bunch of do nothing assholes since they stole the 2000 Presidential election for Bush. Earth to the Supeme Court, you're supposed to uphold the Constitution, now kowtow to whoever is in office.

I guess payback's a bitch, ain't it?
posted by mark13 at 5:07 PM on May 13, 2002


Okay, I'll bite. mark13, how was the Supreme Court better in 1999? Its the same bunch with the same politics with an occasional surprise now and again.
posted by skallas at 8:50 PM on May 13, 2002


« Older ORIGINAL SIN: How prices of initial public offerin...  |  Have you ever wanted to try pa... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments