Nichele Rascoe
MCO 300 – Media Law and Ethics
Dr. Breslin
Name of Case: Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition
Citation: 535 US 234 (2002)
Date of Decision: April 16, 2002
Vote: 6-3
Author of Opinion: Justice Kennedy
Legal Topic: Freedom of Speech
Posture of the Case: The Free Speech Coalition (FSC) (plaintiff) v. John D Ashcroft, Attorney General (defendant). The Federal District Court was summoned against John D. Ashcroft alleging that the Child Pornography Prevention Act is in violation of the First Amendment. Thus restraining the Adult Entertainment Trade Association.
Facts: The Congress enacted the Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA) in 1996 to prohibit “any visual depiction, including any photographs, film, video, picture, or computer –generated images that visually seem to have a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.” New York v. Ferber distinguished child pornography from other explicit speech due to the State’s interest in keeping children protected from exploitation during any visual production process. Pornography can only be banned if considered obscene, which was determined during the Ferber Case. In the case of Miller v. California,) Ferber did not want to reflect on what the state considered obscene. Ferber was more interested in prosecuting those who promote the
…show more content…
Free Speech Coalition, the Supreme Court gave the First Amendment protection to computer – generated or virtual child pornography. Yet, the previous decision in Ferber v. New York virtual pornography is banned. It is considered “real” child pornography. The government held this decision to protect the interest of children. The most serious crime against children is sexual abuse. Congress recognized that many individuals that have such desires for children are likely to commit criminal acts based upon impulse. In addition, serious offenders have the tendency to trade pictures of children as well as written sexual