.-') _ .-') _ | |
( OO ) ) ( OO ) ) | |
.-----. ,--./ ,--,' ,--./ ,--,' | |
' .--./ | \ | |\ | \ | |\ | |
| |('-. | \| | )| \| | ) | |
/_) |OO )| . |/ | . |/ | |
|| |`-'| | |\ | | |\ | | |
(_' '--'\ | | \ | | | \ | | |
`-----' `--' `--' `--' `--' | |
lite.cnn.com - on gopher - inofficial | |
ARTICLE VIEW: | |
Supreme Court declines to block enforcement of age-verification | |
requirements for porn sites | |
By John Fritze, CNN | |
Updated: | |
12:16 PM EDT, Tue April 30, 2024 | |
Source: CNN | |
The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to enforce , rejecting a | |
request from the adult entertainment industry to block the law on First | |
Amendment grounds. | |
Texas’ law requires any website that publishes a substantial amount | |
of content that is “harmful to minors” to verify the age of users. | |
The challengers said the law also forces adults to identify themselves | |
before accessing pornography, which the group’s lawyers said violates | |
access to free speech online. | |
A trade group representing the adult entertainment industry filed an | |
appeal at the Supreme Court and then asked the court to block the law | |
while that appeal is considered. The underlying appeal is still | |
pending. | |
The Supreme Court offered no explanation for its decision Tuesday, | |
common for decisions on its emergency docket. There were no noted | |
dissents. | |
The emergency request followed a that cited Texas’ “legitimate | |
interest in preventing minors’ access to pornography” and allowed | |
the law to take effect. | |
The Supreme Court in 1997 unanimously invalidated provisions of a | |
federal law intended to protect minors from indecent material online | |
because it also imposed First Amendment burdens on adults. But in | |
reviewing the Texas law, the 5th Circuit relied instead on a 1968 | |
precedent in which the Supreme Court let stand a New York law barring | |
the distribution of obscene material to minors. | |
“The record is replete with examples of the sort of damage that | |
access to pornography does to children,” the appeals court wrote. | |
“Because it is never obvious whether an internet user is an adult or | |
a child, any attempt to identify the user will implicate adults in some | |
way.” | |
<- back to index |