Interesting People mailing list archives
IP:Testimony Concludes in CDA Challenge, Closing Arguments Set
From: Dave Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 19:16:29 -0400
----------------------------------------------------------------- _______ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ |__ __| (_) | | | _ \ | | | | | (_) | |_ __ _ __ _| | | |_) |_ _| | | ___| |_ _ _ __ | | '__| |/ _` | | | _ <| | | | | |/ _ \ __| | '_ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |_) | |_| | | | __/ |_| | | | | |_|_| |_|\__,_|_| |____/ \__,_|_|_|\___|\__|_|_| |_| Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition Trial Update No. 10 Pre-Trial Update - April 15, 1996 6:30 pm ET ----------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.cdt.org/ciec/ ciec-info () cdt org ----------------------------------------------------------------- CIEC UPDATES intended for members of the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition. CIEC Updates are written and edited by the Center for Democracy and Technology (http://www.cdt.org). This document may be reposted as long as it remains in total. ------------------------------------------------------------------ ** 40,000 Netizens Vs. U.S. Department of Justice. ** * The Fight To Save Free Speech Online * Contents: o Testimony Concludes in CDA Legal Challenge * Government Only Calls Two Witnesses * Closing Arguments Set for May 10 o How To Unsubscribe from this list o More Information on CIEC and the Center for Democracy and Technology ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) TESTIMONY ENDS IN COURT BATTLE TO OVERTURN THE CDA - CLOSING ARGUMENTS SET FOR MAY 10 Hearings ended today in the constitutional challenge to the Communications Decency Act with the cross-examination of government witness Dan Olsen. The court also announced today that closing arguments in this landmark case will be heard on May 10 (the hearing had originally been scheduled for June 3). Dan Olsen, Chair of the Department of Computer Science Brigham Young University, testified on Friday April 12 about a scheme he developed two weeks ago for rating sexually-explicit content on the Internet. Olsen's proposal would require content providers to label their sites with an "-L18" tag if the site contains sexually oriented material. During cross examination on Friday and again today, CIEC and ACLU lawyers criticized Olsen's proposal as inflexible and extremely difficult to implement. All three judges presiding over the case -- Dolores Sloviter, chief judge of the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. District Judges Stewart Dalzell and Ronald Buckwalter -- questioned Olsen for almost 45 minutes about his proposal, and seemed unconvinced by his presentation. At one point, Judge Sloviter asked, "I am wondering if whether in essence your scheme requires some material to be blocked in advance, and if you can think of any time in our history when we have blocked material in advance in an organized fashion?" Olsen replied that he believed newspaper editors did this routinely. In response to another question from Judge Sloviter, Olsen admitted his plan would "make it easier for the government to censor material" on the Internet if it one day chose to do so directly. GOVERNMENT RESTS ITS CASE AFTER CALLING ONLY TWO WITNESSES The government rested its case today after calling only two witnesses in defense of the Communications Decency Act. The CIEC and ACLU cases called a total of 13 witnesses. Interestingly, over two days of hearings, neither witness offered testimony explicitly defending the CDA as written. Instead, the testimony appeared designed to convince the court that the CDA is narrowly drawn and therefore satisfies the "least restrictive means" test. In short, the government witnesses testified: * That sexually explicit material is available to minors on the Internet (a claim that neither the CIEC nor the ACLU challenges dispute). * Requiring content providers to label content will prevent minors from accessing sexually explicit material on the Internet. CIEC and ACLU attorneys argue that the content labeling scheme proposed by Olsen is would not be a "good faith defense" under the CDA, and is therefore irrelevant, and that the Government has not proven that the Communications Decency Act is the "least restrictive means" of protecting children from inappropriate material on the Internet. Speaking to reporters at the end of today's hearing, CIEC lead attorney Bruce Ennis summarized the last two days of testimony by saying, " ... in the final analysis parents have the ability and the technology to control what kids see ... without reducing all content on the Internet to the level appropriate for an eight-year-old." Ennis added, "This law is unconstitutional." CLOSING ARGUMENTS SET FOR MAY 10 On May 10, the plaintiffs and the government will each present two hours of closing arguments. A decision is expected from the three judge panel in mid-June. Any appeal of the ruling will be made directly to the Supreme Court under expedited review provisions of the Telecommunications Reform Act. For more information, including the text of the transcripts from the first 3 days of testimony (remaining tow days will be posted soon), the text of the complaint, and information on how you can join this historic legal battle, visit the CIEC World Wide Web page at: http://www.cdt.org/ciec/
Current thread:
- IP:Testimony Concludes in CDA Challenge, Closing Arguments Set Dave Farber (Apr 15)