Commentary

Supreme Court Rejects Child Online Protection Act

The Child Online Protection Act is still dead. COPA, signed by President Bill Clinton in 1998, would have required commercial Web sites to block children's access by requiring information from users. Critics said it was overly restrictive and unconstitutional, and the law never took effect.

The Child Online Protection Act is still dead. COPA, signed by President Bill Clinton in 1998, would have required commercial Web sites to block children's access by requiring information from users. Critics said it was overly restrictive and unconstitutional, and the law never took effect.In 2004, the Supreme Court said the Act could restrict access to free speech protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia to determine whether young people could be protected from online obscenity through software filters.

Last year, the lower court decided that software was an equally effective, and less restrictive, way to prevent children from viewing sexually explicit material online.


More Government Insights

White Papers

More >>

Reports

More >>

Webcasts

More >>

The federal government appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that half of American homes where children can access the Internet lack filtering software or other technology to block obscenity.

The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the law and argued that filters are more effective than a U.S. ban, which cannot be applied to foreign Web sites. The law also failed to cover e-mail, newsgroups, and chat rooms, which are used to disseminate pornography.

This week, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, in Mukasey v. ACLU, without comment. That prevents the Act from taking effect.

COPA was Congress' second attempt to restrict sexually explicit and indecent material on the Internet. In 1996, the Supreme Court rejected a similar law that was broader in scope.


Related Reading




Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

InformationWeek encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, InformationWeek moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. InformationWeek further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
T-Shirt Giveaway T-Shirt Giveaway: Each week we're selecting one great comment from our readers. The author of the comment will receive an InformaitonWeek Community t-shirt. So get posting!
Subscribe to RSS

Resource Links