Supreme Court blocks web porn law
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The US Supreme Court blocked a new law designed to protect children from encountering pornography on the internet yesterday - deciding that it interfered with the constitutional right to free speech.
The US Supreme Court blocked a new law designed to protect children from encountering pornography on the internet yesterday - deciding that it interfered with the constitutional right to free speech.
The court ruled 5-4 to send back to a lower court a case involving regulations for website operators that require them to use credit cards or adult access codes and personal identification numbers to keep minors from seeing pornography.
It is the second time the Supreme Court has rejected the legislation. The law passed in 1998 would have authorised fines of up to $50,000 (£28,000) for the crime of placing material that is "harmful to minors" within the easy reach of children on the Net.
The majority of justices said the lower court was correct to block the law from taking effect because it was likely to violate the First Amendment.
That majority, led by Justice Anthony Kennedy, said there may have been important technological advances in the five years since a federal judge blocked the law. It said that holding a new trial would allow discussion of what technology, if any, might allow adults to see and buy material that is legal for them while keeping that material out of the hands of children.
The American Civil Liberties Union said the law would have restricted far too much material that adults may legally see and buy. But a Justice Department spokesman denounced the ruling. "Our society has reached a broad consensus that child obscenity is harmful to our youngest generation and must be stopped," he said.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments