Last updated: January 27, 2009 - 9:24am
[Commentary] A 10-year campaign to censor the Internet ended last week when the Supreme Court refused to step in and save the Child Online Protection Act. Everyone can agree on the need to protect children from sexually explicit online material, but this misguided law tried to do it in ways that infringed on too much constitutionally protected free speech. Society has a legitimate interest in keeping sexually explicit material away from minors. But as the courts have repeatedly emphasized, it cannot be done through a sweeping censorship regime. It is not likely that Congress will rush to take up online indecency again. If it does, it needs to follow the courts' guidance and rely on methods — like filtering software — that keep indecent material away from children without infringing on the free expression rights of everyone else.
Links to Sources
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Related
- Court affirms Child Online Protection Act unconstitutional
- Supreme Court Upholds Child Pornography Law
- Ruling on violent video games: Score one for 1st Amendment
- The high court’s misguided decision on violent video games
- Child porn law at center of free-speech case
- U.S. Court Likely Will Force Google To Turn Over Data
- Fines on broadcasters are not censorship
- Facebook: Federal online privacy rules would violate free speech rights
- A Discomfiting Threat to Free Speech
- Study finds Web isn't teeming with sex
- In Tokyo, a Crackdown on Sexual Images of Minors
- Protecting kids or free speech: Where to draw the line?
- One First Amendment
- Video Games and Free Speech
- Supreme Court Upholds 'Fleeting Expletive' Rule for Now
Ratings
Login to rate this headline.

