Ascroft V. ACLU

9 Pages 2266 Words

image, graphic image file, article, recording, writing, or other matter of any kind that is obscene or that—
(A) The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find, taking the material as a whole and with respect to minors, is designed to appeal to, or is designed to pander to, the prurient interest;
(B) Depicts, describes, or represents, in a manner patently offensive with respect to minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, an actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual act, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals or post-pubescent female breast; and
(C) Taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.
However, a Web Publisher may qualify for defense if he/she has tried to restrict access to the site by means of credit card verification, adult access codes, adult PIN numbers, or other measures made in good faith to restrict access by minors. Violations of COPA may result in civil penalties of up to $50,000 and criminal penalties of up to 6 months in jail and/or a fine of $50,000.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit barred the enforcement of COPA, since the law’s use of “contemporary community standards” to judge Web material made it “substantially overbroad.” John Ashcroft, the Attorney General of the U.S. appealed this ruling. The U.S Supreme Court accepted this appeal and vacated the Court of Appeal’s decision.
In determining whether COPA violated the First Amendment, Justice Thomas recognized that “obscene speech…has long been held to fall outside the purview of the First Amendment.” However, the Court of Appeals reasoned that Miller v. California’s reliance on community standards could not be applied to the medium of the Internet since “Web publishers are currently without the ability to control the geographic scope of the recipients of their communications.” Therefore, the issue that the U.S. ...