FC: Responses to Supreme Court upholding library filtering-funding law

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

Here's the decision itself:
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/02-361.html

The ALA chat is archived at the URL Robert provided below (sorry for delay 
in sending this out).

-Declan

---

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 14:22:18 -0400
From: Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan () washingtonpost com>
Subject: filtering decision Live Online
To: declan () well com

Hi Declan,
We're going to have Emily Shektoff, executive director of the American
Library Association's
DC office, as a guest for a Live Online discussion about the
implications of the Supreme Court
ruling on the Children's Internet Protection Act. The session runs
from 3 to 4 p.m. here:

http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/zforum/03/sp_technews_shektoff062303.htm

If any Politech readers are interested, we're happy to take questions.
Thanks,
Robert

---

Subject: Supreme Court Filtering Decision - Child Pawn
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
        boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C339EA.95BDA478"
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:50:19 -0700
From: "Clinton D. Fein" <clinton.fein () apollomedia com>
To: "Declan McCullagh" <declan () well com>

Hi Declan:

While I have no doubt you will be covering this predictable, but 
unfortunate Supreme Court decision, here is the Annoy.com take, which looks 
at the extent to which even the dissenters seemed to ignore the intended 
target of the legislation. Children.

I guess perseverance eventually renders old constitutional arguments 
meaningless.

Clinton

Child Pawn
June 23, 2003
<http://www.annoy.com/editorials/doc.html?DocumentID=100501>http://www.annoy.com/editorials/doc.html?DocumentID=100501

[Excerpt]
Today, a divided Supreme Court ruled that Congress can force the nation's 
public libraries to equip computers with anti-pornography filters.

The fundamentally flawed blocking technology, intended to keep smut from 
children, does not violate the First Amendment even though it shuts off 
some legitimate, if not critically and life-saving importantly 
informational Web sites, such as how to practice safe sex, the court held.

Despite the sharply divided ruling, the biggest losers in todays decision 
were young people intelligent enough to make informed decisions, but too 
young to enjoy the freedoms available to adults under the First Amendment.

                                                                                                                        
            [...]

If a teenager seeking information about avoiding sexually transmitted 
diseases or avoiding pregnancy is not a legitimate reason to allow 
unfiltered access to Internet materials, it cannot be said that the statute 
represents legitimate objectives claiming to protect children. And even if 
the court had even bothered to address childrens access in a meaningful 
manner, Rehnquist observed wryly that "the Constitution does not guarantee 
the right to acquire information at a public library without any risk of 
embarrassment." A surefire way to encourage children seeking information 
that would be too embarrassing to ask of adults! Justice Souter, who 
dissented, argued that if the only First Amendment issues raised were those 
of children he would have no problem upholding the application of the Act, 
stating, "I do not think that the awkwardness a child might feel on asking 
for an unblocked terminal is any such burden as to affect 
constitutionality." Once again, it is difficult to take the stated 
objective of protecting the interests of children seriously.
[/Excerpt]

_________________________

Clinton Fein
Editor & Publisher
Annoy.com
555 Florida Street, Suite 407
San Francisco, CA  94110
Phone: 415-552-7655
Fax: 415-552-7656
<http://annoy.com/>http://annoy.com/
_________________________





-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------