Search Options
close
Search the following clips:
All Clips
Everyone's Clips
My Guides
Sign Up
Install
Learn More
Login
Child porn is not protected speech: Supreme Court
wiccantexan
follow
0
5-19-2008 10:36 PM
282 views
tags:
child
,
children
,
porn
,
free speech
,
law
Add a Comment
Login
to Comment. Not a member yet?
Sign up
Related Clips
MISSING CHILD
5-Year-Old Leaves Day Care and Goes to Ho...
5-Year-Old Leaves Day Care, Goes to Hooters
The Way We Were: 10 Crucial Child Psycholo...
Breakthrough in animal part transplants fo...
Child molester hasn't served single day of...
What is appropriate discipline?
More clips from
wiccantexan
Obama's Private Prayer 'Leaked'
In marriage debate, divorce church from state
'Pull Your Pants Up' Movement Draws Critic...
Today's Top Clips
High Speed Photography
Hero
Jupiter
Time - as an abstract idea –beautiful illustration
California becomes first state to ban trans fats
Solar Sailing in Space
The CO2 extractor
"Time" - Wheel of Life
Aboriginal Rock Art at Risk
Do Not Read This !
visit the
Top Clips page
View the Top Clips from
May 19, 2008
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
<div style="margin: 12px 0px; font-family: arial; color: #333333; background: #ffffff; border: solid 4px #e5e5e5; width: 100%; clear: left;"><div class="CM_CTB_Content_Wrap" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;background-color: #ffffff;"><div style="border-bottom: solid 1px #dcdcdc; white-space: nowrap; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: #eeeeee ;background-image: url(http://clipmarks.com/images/source-bg.gif); background-repeat: repeat-x; height: 24px; line-height: 24px; vertical-align: middle; padding-bottom: 4px; color: #666666; font-size: 10px;" ><a href="http://clipmarks.com/clip-to-blog/" title="see clips that are hot right now"><img src="http://content.clipmarks.com/blog_embed/4d3a4872-a8d6-4555-9239-35de80a63a9a/9039A981-2E28-4819-8611-EE0209EB6832/" alt="" width="19" height="19" border="0" style="vertical-align: middle; margin: 0px 4px; display: inline; border: none; float:none;" /></a>clipped from <a title="http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/19/scotus.porn/index.html?eref=rss_us" href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/19/scotus.porn/index.html?eref=rss_us" style="font-size: 11px;">www.cnn.com</a></div><blockquote style="text-align: left; padding: 0px 8px; margin: 4px 0px 8px 0px; background: transparent; border: none;" cite="http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/19/scotus.porn/index.html?eref=rss_us">The Supreme Court on Monday upheld a law aimed at preventing child pornography, ruling a provision dealing with "pandering" illicit material does not violate constitutional protections on free speech.</blockquote><div style="height: 2px; font-size: 2px; background: #dcdcdc; border-bottom: solid 1px #f5f5f5; margin: 2px 4px;"></div><blockquote style="text-align: left; padding: 0px 8px; margin: 4px 0px 8px 0px; background: transparent; border: none;" cite="http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/19/scotus.porn/index.html?eref=rss_us"> The 7-2 ruling rejected suggestions the law is overly broad, and will stifle a range of expressive or artistic material that is not obscene.</blockquote><div style="height: 2px; font-size: 2px; background: #dcdcdc; border-bottom: solid 1px #f5f5f5; margin: 2px 4px;"></div><blockquote style="text-align: left; padding: 0px 8px; margin: 4px 0px 8px 0px; background: transparent; border: none;" cite="http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/19/scotus.porn/index.html?eref=rss_us"> The case involves Michael Williams, convicted in a Florida federal court for promoting child pornography on the Internet.</blockquote><div style="height: 2px; font-size: 2px; background: #dcdcdc; border-bottom: solid 1px #f5f5f5; margin: 2px 4px;"></div><blockquote style="text-align: left; padding: 0px 8px; margin: 4px 0px 8px 0px; background: transparent; border: none;" cite="http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/19/scotus.porn/index.html?eref=rss_us"> A three-judge panel concluded the provision was "substantially overbroad and vague," and that "non-commercial, non-inciteful promotion of illegal child pornography, even if repugnant, is protected free speech." In other words, the judges said merely talking about child porn is not necessarily criminal.</blockquote><div style="height: 2px; font-size: 2px; background: #dcdcdc; border-bottom: solid 1px #f5f5f5; margin: 2px 4px;"></div><blockquote style="text-align: left; padding: 0px 8px; margin: 4px 0px 8px 0px; background: transparent; border: none;" cite="http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/19/scotus.porn/index.html?eref=rss_us"><P> Souter wrote that a double standard exists since those pandering images not involving minors engaging in simulated sex could now be prosecuted, but possession of those images would not be subject to prosecution.</P></blockquote></div><div style="margin: 0px 6px 6px 4px;"><table style="font-size: 11px;border-spacing: 0px;padding: 0px;" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tr><td style="background:transparent;border-width:0px;padding:0px;"> </td><td align="right" style="background:transparent;border-width:0px;padding:0px;width:107px" width="107"><a href="http://clipmarks.com/share/9039A981-2E28-4819-8611-EE0209EB6832/blog/" title="blog or email this clip"><img src="http://content6.clipmarks.com/images/c2b-foot.png" border="0" alt="blog it" width="107" height="17" style="border-width:0px;padding:0px;margin:0px;" /></a></td></tr></table></div></div>
Clipmarks
Home
New Clips
Top Clips
Dashboard
Popular Topics
News
Life
Science
Technology
Entertainment
Get Started
Sign Up
Install Clipping Tool
How Clipping Works
Clip-to-Blog™
ClipSearch
Tools and Resources
FAQ
ClipWeek
Top Clippers
Top Tags
Site Map
About Clipmarks
About Us
Contact
Blog
Copyright
Privacy
EULA
OK