1. Terri Bassett and Susan Stilwell CT554 11-17-03 Can Censorship be Reconciled with the Bill of Rights? The Children’s Internet Protection Act: Legal and Ethical Considerations

2. What is censorship? What is the First Amendment? History: CDA, COPA Ginsberg Test CIPA Harmful to Minors Ethical Considerations Ginsberg vs New York Family Law Parental Responsibilities Issues with filtering

3. Censorship is “the action of a censor.” Censor: “one who acts as an overseer of morals and conduct. An official empowered to examine written or printed matter, motion pictures, etc. in order to forbid publication if objectionable” (Webster, 125). What is Censorship?

4. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” The First Amendment

5. unlawful to knowingly transmit indecent Internet messages to children under eighteen years of age. It also included sending a display of “patently offensive sexually explicit” (West’s) messages to anyone under eighteen years of age. The law did not just apply to Internet sites but included e-mail, chat rooms, listservs, and news groups The Supreme Court then declared that CDA’s “content-based restriction on speech was unconstitutionally overboard and not narrowly tailored ” History 1996 Communication Decency Act (CDA)

6. This act “imposes criminal and civil penalties on anyone who knowingly and with knowledge of the character of the material uses the World Wide Web to make available to persons under seventeen a commercial communication that is harmful to minors” (West’s). This act differs from CDA in that it applies only to printed materials on the World Wide Web. It requires evaluation of the material according to the three guidelines of the Ginsberg Test Children’s Online Protection Act (COPA) 1998.

7. predominantly appeals to the prurient, shameful, or morbid interests of minors is patently offensive to prevailing standards is utterly without redeeming social importance for minors Ginsberg Test

8. Federal Judge in Philadelphia Feb. 1999 injunction Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision that COPA was violation of the First Amendment, due to placing an “impermissible burden on speech;” the “Contemporary community standard to identify material harmful to minors” was overboard. Supreme Court May 2002 reliance on “community standards” did not itself render COPA overboard remanded the decision to the Third Circuit os it could reconsider the constitutionality of the statute

9. Introduced 1999. Law Dec. 21, 2000 required the installation of filtering or blocking material on the Internet on computers with Internet access to be eligible to receive or retain universal service assistance (E-rate). CIPA Children’s Internet Protection Act

10. minor (defined as an individual who has not attained the age of 17) any picture, image graphic image file or other visual depiction that: Harmful to Minors

11. (A) taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion; (B) depicts, describes, or represents in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and (C) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value as to minors." (Jenner & Block CIPA)

12. filtering of obscene as defined by the federal obscenity statute child pornography For Adults:

13. May 2002 Circuit Court of Appeals Only applied to libraries because there were not plaintiffs representing the schools. Congress had exceeded the authority of the spending clause (US Constitution, Article 1, Clause 1) if public libraries comply, they will violate the First Amendment (United States Et Al 5)

14. March 2003 US Government appealed to the Supreme Court Overturned the lower court ruling Most libraries choose to exclude pornography from their print collections. The Supreme Court felt that it didn’t make sense to “treat libraries’ judgments to block online pornography any differently” (United States Et Al 11), Libraries could choose to not filter but would lose the Federal E-rate money Libraries may unblock a computer at the request of an adult in order to access blocked material (United States Et Al. 14).

15. ACLU and others oppose CIPA on the belief that children have First Amendment rights this includes access to inappropriate materials Ethical Considerations

16. states might deem certain materials obscene for minors even if the materials are legal for adults. Ginsberg vs New York (390 U.S. 629 1968)

17. what is appropriate for a 16 year old may not be appropriate for a 6 year old high schools have different educational needs than those of elementary schools

18. reaches the age of 18 gets married (before 18) leaves home and supports him or herself (Family Law) Family Law: A child is a minor until he/she-

19. Maynard and others believe it is the parents responsibility to know what sites are appropriate and which are not Parents need to teach their children; not pass on that responsibility to government Parental Responsibility

20. Overblocking Underblocking Political Correctness Enforcing a code of political correctness Missed educational opportunities Filters generally search for specific words resulting in:

21. “A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views” (ALA). Adopted June 18, 1948; amended February 2, 1961 and January 23, 1980; and the ALA Council reaffirmed the inclusion of “age” January 23, 1996. The American Library Association Position

22. Yes, it can when taken in the context of minors. No, it can’t in regards to adults as long as the material is not obscene or child pornography (which is illegal for all) Can censorship be reconciled with the Bill of Rights?

23. Works Cited American Library Association. “Library Bill of Rights”. October 15, 2003.. American Library Association. “The Library services and Technology Act” October 2, 2003.. Baird, Robert. Cyberethics: Social & Moral Issues in the Computer Age. New York: Prometheus Books, 2000. Conn, Kathleen. “Protecting Children from Internet Harm(again): Will the Children’s Internet Protection Act Survive Judicial Scrutiny?” West’s Education Law Reporter. July 5, 2001.. Family Law. “Parental Rights and Responsibilities. It’s Legal”. Electronic Frontier Foundation, The (EFF) and the Online Group (OPG). “Internet Blocking in Public Schools: A Study on Internet Access in Educational Institutions”.. Jenner & Block. “Children’s Internet Protection Act Frequently Asked Questions”..

24. Jenner & Block. “Minors’ Rights to Receive Information Under the First Amendment”.. Martin, Peter. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. March 14, 1993.. Maynard, J.G. “CIPA and the Freedom of the Press”. The Libertarian Enterprise. Number 177. June 10, 2002.. Merriam-Webster Dictionary, The. New York: Gulf & Western Corporation, 1974. 106 th Congress 1 st Session S.97 “Children’s Internet Protection Act (First Introduced in Senate) January 19, 1999.. Thornburgh, D. and H. S. Lin Editors. “Youth, Pornography, and the Internet”.. United States, Et Al., Appellants v. American Library Association. Inc., Et Al. No. 02-361 Argued March 5, 2003—Decided June 23,2003. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi- bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=02-361>.