Complaw Joint BK Review

Complaw Joint BK Review - Constitutional Law Child...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Constitutional Law Child Pornography Advertising Jurisdiction Free Speech and Pornography o First Amendment Strict Scrutiny – is law necessary to achieve compelling government interest. Gov’t has burden of proof, bad for Uncle Sam Applied with race, ethnicity, alienage and fundamental rights(speech, vote, travel etc) Intermediate Scrutiny – is law substantially related to important government interest. Gov’t has burden of proof Rational Relationship – is law rationally related to a legitimate government objective. Challenger had burden of proof o Regulating Speech Government can regulate time, place and manner Regulation must be content-neutral , allow for speech to take place and narrowly tailored to serve a significant state interest. Case: Ward v. Rock against Racism o City required bands to use sound equipment provided by city while the band wanted to use their own. Band loses since it was content-neutral and the city had an interest in keeping noise down. Government can regulate vocal utterings that are not speech Government can prevent Incitement, Obscenity, Child Porn, Defamation, Commercial Speech Case: FCC v. Pacifica o Pacifica radio broadcasts a 12 minute monologue of filthy words and a father complains. Court holds that state has compelling interest to prevent children from hearing dirty words. Government can regulate vocal utterings that constitute actions Bribes, oral contracts Communications Decency Act Supposed to protect minors from encountering indecent material on internet. ACLU challenges law and wins. The CDA would have blocked legitimate info such as birth control, STDs and stuff on breast cancer Child Online Protection Act (COPA) was passed which imposed a 50,000 fine to people who posted internet
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
content harmful to minors unless they restricted access by requiring use of credit cards. This too was struck down. o Porn Two outdated definitions (Roth and Memoir) Roth defines it as material dealing with sex appealing to the prurient interest Memoir three part test includes the Roth test and adds that the material is utterly w/o redeeming social value and it affronts community standards The MILLER test Would average person applying contemporary community standards say the work appeals to prurient interest? Does work depict or describe sexual conduct in an offensive way defined by state law? Does the work lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value? Now, the government does not have to prove its utterly without redeeming value, making it easier for the government Case: US v. Thomas There was a bulletin board service that uploaded naughty pictures for paid subscribers. They were convicted under federal obscenity laws. The Miller Test was applied The court did not know which community standards to apply? Thomas tried to argue that cyberspace had its own community but court allowed Tennessee to try the case by
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 05/05/2008 for the course CPSC 180 taught by Professor Robertdunne during the Spring '06 term at Yale.

Page1 / 31

Complaw Joint BK Review - Constitutional Law Child...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online