In Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union 521 U.S. 844 (1997), the Supreme Court declared the Communications Decency Act (CDA) unconstitutional. The CDA was a vague attempt at regulating explicit material on the Internet. Sexually explicit text, pictures, and chat exist on the Internet and are accessible in the same was as non-explicit materials are. Web users rarely unintentionally stumble upon such erotica. The issue at court here is if minors should not be able to access the same content as adults.
Judge Stevens wrote that age verification on the Internet is impractical. He then brings attention to the vagueness of the CDA; the act uses "indecent" and another clause, but does not bother to define either. The problem is that the CDA, according to the Supreme Court, is that it is a content-based regulation of speech, and the vagueness of the act collides with the First Amendment's Free Speech clause. Additionally, the CDA is a criminal statute, and has a "chilling effect" on free speech -- speech that may have been said might not due to fear of two years in prison, citizens will become fearful of saying "arguably unlawful" words, ideas, pictures, and so on.
The CDA is very nebulous in regulating Internet speech; it silences potentially offensive speech that adults have a constitutional right to receive in order to prevent minors from receiving the speech. According to Judge Stevens, this burden on adults is unacceptable as it infringes on the freedom of adults. The cure is worst than the disease; and the CDA is unconstitutional.
External links
