- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
- Messages
- 11,705
- Reaction score
- 18,276
Don't worry, he's completely misrepresenting the case. You don't have to believe me, just read the link.
In short, the Court struck down two provisions in a law passed by Congress as overly broad. Essentially, the way the law was written, the Court felt it would have theoretically given prosecutors tools to go after viewers/creators of films such as Traffic and American Beauty (both these movies were actually cited in the decision); as they both featured scenes of simulated sex between an adult and a minor. The actual provision SCOTUS had a problem with, was: "any visual depiction, including any photography, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture" that "is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct." The majority held that this provision could be misused, as: "Even if a film contains no sexually explicit scenes involving minors, it could be treated as child pornography if the title and trailers convey the impression that the scenes would be found in the movie."
SCOTUS thought that was too broad and told Congress to go amend the law or just strike that one provision. SCOTUS even noted in both it's dissent, and concurring opinion that future technology would likely require them to draft some very specific laws in order to be within bounds of the 1st Amendment. So no, this wasn't a bunch a liberals cheering on anime porn. It was them telling Congress to do a better job.
I agree that this is going to be a problem moving forward. But the Court's only job is to make sure Congress doesn't trample on our rights when making any law. It's Congress's job to make laws that actually pass muster.
