
Originally Posted by
The Orlando Sentinel
Court backs child-porn restriction
Mark Sherman | The Associated Press
May 20, 2008
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that leading someone to believe you have child pornography to show or exchange is a federal crime, brushing aside concerns that the law could apply to mainstream movies that depict adolescent sex, classic literature or e-mails that describe photos of grandchildren.
The court, in a 7-2 decision, upheld a law aimed at cracking down on the online exchange of illicit images of children.
Joan Bertin, executive director of the National Coalition Against Censorship, said Justice Antonin Scalia's narrow reading of the law in his majority opinion should result in "considerably less damage than it might otherwise have done." But, Bertin said, prosecutors still could try to punish people for innocent activity.
The ruling upheld part of a 2003 law that also prohibits possession of child pornography. It replaced an earlier law the court had struck down as unconstitutional.
The new law sets a five-year mandatory prison term for promoting, or pandering, child pornography. It does not require that someone actually possess child pornography.
Opponents have said the law could apply to movies such as Traffic or Titanic that depict adolescent sex or the marketing of other material that might not be pornography.
Scalia's opinion said the law takes a reasonable approach to the issue by applying it to situations where the purveyor of the material believes or wants a listener to believe that he has child pornography.
The First Amendment does not protect "offers to provide or requests to obtain child pornography," Scalia said.