NEW YORK (CNNfn) - The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard arguments for the first time on a landmark case concerning free speech on the Internet. At issue is a law that restricts indecent pictures and words in cyberspace.
The Law, which was passed in February 1996 as part of the Telecommunications Act, would regulate the Internet with standards that are applied to broadcast media, rather than using the looser standards applied to print.
After its passage, varied groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, Microsoft Corp., and the American Library Association banded together to file a lawsuit to stop its enforcement.
A panel of federal judges in Philadelphia blocked the law last year and said the legislation, which aims to keep pornography from being transmitted to children, would restrict adults' legal access to such material.
During 70 minutes of arguments Wednesday, the high court justices vigorously questioned both sides about the rapidly changing Internet technology and whether minors could be prevented from accessing sexually explicit material.
Christopher Wolf, an attorney who deals with technology and First Amendment law for Proskauer, Rose, Goetz & Mendelsohn, said the problem is with the scope of the law.
"There's been a long tradition in our country under the First Amendment that any restriction on speech has to be the most narrowly tailored possible," Wolf told CNNfn's "Before Hours."
"What the lower courts found in this case is that this law, which bans 'indecent or offensive' speech, is much too vague."
Wolf said this issue, like many other free speech and censorship issues, raises the question of who gets to decide what is indecent or offensive.
He worried that legitimate material on the Internet dealing with the human form, such as breast cancer or Michelangelo's nude sculpture "David," could fall under the jurisdiction.
Laws to deal with the sometimes fuzzy issue of what constitutes pornography already exist today, he said. (120K WAV) or (120K AIFF)
Even if the law were allowed to stand, enforcing it would be difficult. A decision would have to be made as to what U.S. government agency would be in charge of regulating the Internet. The U.S. would also have to deal with the standards of other countries.
Wolf cited the anonymity of the Web as another difficulty. A person transmitting questionable material may not be aware that the person receiving it is underage.
Wolf feels that the new law, which was tacked onto the Telecom legislation without a public hearing dealing with its effect, cannot do an effective job.
"Everybody's against pornography that children might have access to. There are other, more limited ways to deal with it."
|
