Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The U.S. Supreme Court Addresses The Child Pornography Prevention Act And Child Online Protection Act In Ashcroft V. Free Speech Coalition And Ashcroft V. American Civil Liberties Union, Sue Ann Mota
Federal Communications Law Journal
Both the Child Pornography Prevention Act ("CPPA") and the Child Online Protection Act ("COPA") were intended by Congress to protect minors. The CPPA was intended to protect minors from the harmful effects of virtual child pornography. The COPA was intended to protect minors from pornography currently available commercially on the World Wide Web. However, in 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of both statutes: The Court struck down sections of the CPPA as overbroad and unconstitutional in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. In Ashcroft v. ACLU, the Court upheld some sections of COPA as not unconstitutionally overbroad, but …
Reacting To Ashcroft V. Free Speech Coalition And The Burial Of The Cppa: An Argument To Regulate Digital Child Pornography Because It Incites Imminent Lawless Action, Justin Leach
Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law
Part I discusses the nature and origin of digital child pornography and how child pornography has traditionally fit into First Amendment analysis. Part II discusses Congress' reaction to digital innovations in child pornography by passing the Child Pornography Prevention Act and, Part II further explains the federal appellate courts' treatment of the CPPA. Part III discusses the history and arguments made for each side in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. Part IV discusses the legal and constitutional analysis of the Supreme Court in striking down the regulations that banned digital child pornography. Finally, Part V makes an additional constitutional argument, …