FC: GOP legislators to Supremes: Save our anti-Internet porn law!

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

The amicus brief to be filed Friday:
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/copa.congress.072501.html

Politech archive on the Child Online Protection Act law and lawsuit:
http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=copa

Supreme Court agrees to hear case:
http://www.politechbot.com/p-02048.html

Federal judge rules that COPA violates First Amendment:
http://www.politechbot.com/p-00217.html

Note from Bruce Taylor <BruceTaylor () NationalLawCenter org>, who drafted the 
brief:
> (we made changes to the cover and page 1 on Interest of Amici, since Senator
> Coats cannot be an amicus because of his nomination to be Ambassador to
> Germany)
>
> Attached is a corrected final Brief of Members of Congress in Ashcroft v
> ACLU, No. 00-1293, to be filed Friday, July 27th, instead of tomorrow.
>
> We renamed it "COPA final USSC Cong amicus brief 7-27-01"
>
> Transmissions scrambled some formatting and we had to re-justify the margins
> and re-send to the printer.  This one should be fully justified, but
> otherwise same text.  If you copy or post, please use this one, which will
> look like the printed one filed with the Court (hopefully).

-Declan

***********

http://www.politechbot.com/docs/copa.congress.072501.html

Summary Of Argument
The Court of Appeals committed clear error in its refusal to narrowly 
construe the Child Online Protection Act's definition of "Harmful To 
Minors," 47 U.S.C. § 231 (e)(6), within a constitutionally valid scope and 
lend the necessary authoritative construction intended by Congress as a 
limitation on the test for what is "Obscene For Minors" to a 
constitutionally valid, non-geographic "adult" age community standard, 
rather than an unconstitutionally territorial geographic community 
standard. ACLU v. Reno, 217 F.3d 162, 173-78 (3d Cir. 2000), reh. denied 
(2000).
Congress enacted COPA with specific recognition of this Court's mandate 
that the application of obscenity-related tests for separating pornography 
that may be regulated from First Amendment protected speech depends on the 
medium. FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726, 750 (1978).
The Congressional intent expressed in its Report of the House Committee on 
Commerce, H. Rept. No. 105-775, at 28 (1998) (House Report to accompany 
H.R. 3783, 105th Cong., 2d Sess.), was that COPA was to be adapted to the 
World Wide Web by using a "new" standard of what the American adult-age 
community as a whole would find prurient and offensive for minors in the 
probable recipient age group. The Third Circuit refused to adopt this 
Congressionally intended customization of the "harmful to minors" test and, 
by such refusal, interpreted the Act in an unconstitutional fashion. ACLU, 
217 F.3d at 178. By doing so, that Court, as had the District Court below, 
failed in its duty to properly construe this federal statute so as to save 
it for valid application within constitutional boundaries.
For these reasons, this Court should reverse the decision of the Court of 
Appeals, and remand the cause to the Third Circuit for a narrowing 
authoritative construction to guide the District Court in the trial on the 
merits.

Remainder at:
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/copa.congress.072501.html




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------