Supreme Court and Virtual Child Porn On January 22, 2001, the United States Supreme Court granted the government's petition for review on the issue of the constitutionality of the 1996 Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA) in which Congress sought to modernize federal law by enhancing its ability to combat child pornography in the computer era. (Holder) CPPA classifies an image that "appears to be" or "conveys the impression" of a minor engaging in sexually explicit acts as "virtual" child pornography. Such images include a photograph of a real child that may be scanned, replicated and manipulated by computer to create a sexually-oriented photo, or a wholly fake child that may be generated solely by computer graphics. By enacting this law, Congress recognized a loophole in the child pornography law, in that technological improvements have made it possible for child pornographers to use computers to "morph" or alter innocent images of actual children to create a composite image showing them in sexually explicit poses. With this in mind Congress intended to (1) ban computer-generated images that are "virtually indistinguishable" from those of real children, (2) to protect the privacy of actual children whose innocuous images are altered to create sexually explicit images and (3) to deprive child abusers of a "criminal tool" frequently used to facilitate the sexual abuse of children. (Child) As reported in the July 2000 Obscenity Law Bulletin, the Ninth Circuit in Free Speech Coalition v. Reno, 198 F.3d 1083 (9th Cir. 1999), struck down CPPA as a content-based restriction on protected speech not in furtherance of any compelling government interest because the prohibited images are not of actual children. According to that Court, "Because the 1996 Act attempts to criminalize disavowed impulses of the mind, manifested in illicit creative acts, we determine that censorship through the enactment of criminal laws intended to control an evil idea cannot satisfy the constitutional requirements of the First Amendment." This ruling splits with other circuits: United States v. Hilton, 167 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 1999) ("The government's interest in addressing these forms of child pornography is no less powerful than in instances where an actual child is used and abused during the production process. We will not second-guess Congress's decision to address the social ills posed by the various types of virtual child pornography."); United States v. Acheson, 195 F.3d 645 (11th Cir. 1999) ("Notwithstanding the risk of suppressing protected expression, Congress and the states are entitled to greater leeway in the regulation of pornographic depictions of children...) In March 2000 in United States v. Pearl, the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Northern Division, upheld CPPA against vagueness and overbreadth challenges. The Court rejected the Free Speech holding and aligned itself instead with Hilton and Acheson finding the language of the statute "sufficiently narrowly tailored to promote the compelling government interest in preventing harm to actual children, based on substantiated Congressional findings that virtual pornography was used to seduce actual children into sexual activity, and thus comported with free speech guarantees." WORKS CITED: Child Pornography Prevention Act. http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cppa.text.html Holder v. Free Speech Coalition, Docket No. 00-795). http://www.ballononecommerce.com/ballononecommerce/updates/ch46upd.html
In the Bjorn, MN case of restricting “Animal Attractions” from selling the video, Hands Up!, the cities obscenity law directly violates the United States constitution, and the First Amendments guarantee of freedom of speech and expression. In the past, the Supreme Court of the United States had written that sexual materials could be deemed obscene if they were found to be "utterly without redeeming social importance" (Roth v. United States, Alberts v. California). This broad restriction, however, received numerous additions in the 1973 case, Miller v. California. In this case, the court established a three-prong test, which is as follows:
The case that I chose to analyze is Reno v. ACLU. It is the first Internet related U.S. Supreme Court case ever to be decided. Seven of the justices found the argued provisions of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) were unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The court found that the Internet is similar to a shopping mall or library not a broadcast medium as the government refered to it. The majority opinion for this case was that the Internet is a unique marketplace for ideas. The ruling states that while there is a large amount of pornographic material out there, it normally isn’t come across on accident. They stated that the CDA already holds back a good amount of speech that is alright for adult to adult conversations, which they do have a constitutional right to receive. While they recognize the CDA efforts to protect children from harmful speech and pornographic material, it still does not justify the unnecessarily broad suspension of speech. The final outcome was that they found that what the CDA was trying to do would violate speakers messages who are rightfully protected under the First Amendment.
In her essay “Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet,” Susan Brownmiller, a prominent feminist activist, argues that pornography should not be protected under the First Amendment (59). Her position is based on the belief that pornography is degrading and abusive towards women (Brownmiller 59). She introduces the reader to the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, and explains how it relates to her beliefs on censoring pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). In addition, she provides examples of First Amendment controversies such as Miller v. California and James Joyce’s Ulysses to explain how the law created a system to define pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). She described the system that used a three-part test as confusing (Brownmiller 58). Regardless of whether or not the First Amendment was intended to protect obscenities, she and many others believe that the legislatures should have the final say in the decision of creating and publishing pornography (Brownmiller 60).
In 1998, a district court in Virginia made a ruling on the use of filtering software in public libraries that set a precedent for the unconstitutionality of internet filters. Todd Anten’s article, “Please Disable the Entire Filter: Why Non-Removable Filters on Public Library Computers Violate the First Amendment gives an account of the ruling. The Loudoun County Library had instituted restrictions to internet access on all library computers with software that would block sites that “displayed obscene material, child pornog...
Cyber porn raised so many first amendment questions when the government tries to regulate who controls the flow of all that information. In my opinion the only reason pornography is on the internet is a big deal is because kids are now learning about sex at an early age. But in reality, these pornographic relation sites are only a very small fraction of the million sites out there on the World Wide Web. There has been a big discussion of suggestions a rating system. There has been a rating system for sex, violence, nudity and bad vocabulary that was successful with being on video games and movies. The Recreational Software Advisory Council found that thousands of websites and home screens could be rated and controlled. There wouldn’t be no problems with violating rights if this only leads to making sure that kids cannot have access...
"Congress Begins Taking Action to Stop Child Pornography." The American Center for Law and Justice E-Newsletter. 22 May 2014 .
Kaminer start her argument by saying that it is possible that “virtual” child pornography may encourage pedophiles to act on their impulses or may help them in seducing children, but there is no evidence proving that these images have that want effects. She relied her sources on stating what the Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA)prohibited and what she believe they fail to realize and considered when making the Act of 1996. She also made points on how movies and ads are involved in “virtual” child pornography.
Dating back all the way to the 1980’s, before the internet, pornography was still a very popular and readily accessible phenomenon sweeping the nation. Many groups have tried to shut down the whole institution for the stigma it has of being very distasteful and obscene. These groups, including feminists, religious groups, and even the Reagan administration, for years, have been working toward legislation to outlaw pornography.(Suderman) What they don’t realize is that they are actually trying to remove a safe and creative sexual outlet for many people. Pornography can be defined very differently from person to person. Most people would say that it is simply words, pictures, or videos that they find sexually explicit. In 1964, Justice Potter Stewart said “I can’t define pornography, but I know it when I see it”. (“Pornography and Obscenetity”). Pornography allows people to explore their fantasies from the privacy of their own home, it allows them a safer alternative in most situations, and in some cases it can even be used as a way to educate people.
Child Pornography is a particularly serious crime in the United States. The crime involves exploitation of children sexually by offenders who seek to benefit either directly or indirectly from the vice. This article looks at child pornography in different perspectives and explains its trends in arrests made in the year 2000 and 2006. The article used data from the national juvenile online victimization study, which is a longitudinal survey of a sample of 2500 law enforcement agencies in the US. Trends of child pornography basing on ethnicity are also highlighted with the whites and the Hispanics being the subjects of investigation. The direction of the crimes, arrests, and prosecution of individual in relation to child pornography is discussed. The history of the culprits is also used to describe some aspects of child pornography. The distribution of offenders among different age brackets is also exposed in the article. The fate of those caught and prosecuted with child pornography is evaluated and analyzed in relation to severity and effectiveness of the punishments.
McCarthy, M. (2005). THE CONTINUING SAGA OF INTERNET CENSORSHIP: THE CHILD ONLINE PROTECTION ACT. Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal, (2), 83-101.
Child pornography may be difficult to identify. In the 1960’s, Supreme Court Justice Stewart coined the phrase “I know it when I see it”, a legal phrase which is actually still used today. Although, this statement was in reference to obscene material in an adult pornography case, Jacobeellis v. Ohio, Justice Stewart explained that not all issues can be definitively defined, but there are some issues that do not require a specific definition in order to know what actions the law should be taking (Gillespie, 2010). The Internet poses great challenges to the law because of global involvement. Communication and distribution across boarders has made it impossible for a consistent definition of child pornography, which creates a weak foundation in combating this heinous crime. Gillespie addresses identifying factors that define what child pornography i...
Protecting children from sexual exploration is a modern concept. “As late as the 1880s in the United States, the age of consent for girls was just 10 years.” (Pg4Ln2-3) From 1977-88 only two states had legislation specifically outlawed the use of children in obscene material, the first federal law was passed, and a law that specified to child pornography. From a federal stand point a child is anyone under the age of eighteen. The definitions of both child and pornography differ amo...
and accept his own fate at the end of the play. The plot moves in
One way that child pornography is produced unintentionally is through an activity known as ‘Sexting’.‘Sexting’ is the act of sending sexually explicit pictures and messages and accounts for a large majority of explicit pictures online. A 2012 study by the National Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) showed that 40 per cent of teens had engaged in the activity of ‘Sexting’. What those teens often don’t realise is that once those images are out there they are free to be reproduced and redistributed across the internet. A 2012 study by the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), found that 88 per cent of self generated images were redistributed after being uploaded online.
A sex crime program that attacks the core of child pornography is the programs ACPO (Anti-Child Pornography Organization). This program was set up to rid the Internet of loose links. By loose links, meaning the links that transfer an online user to a site that they are not looking for. For example, if you typed in ‘car’, and were sent to a pornographic site, that would classify as a loose link. The people who shut these sites down are called net nannies. They surf the web looking for sites where average words will send the link to a pornographic site. This is especially aimed at the types of words persons younger than 18 would look for. This program has been extremely effective because it attacks the source of the problem. Once the net nannies find a site that violates this conduct they contact the site provider, and shut it down. This penalty may be harsh, but the web providers know the rules, and if they violate those rules they should be shut down.