Case Name: Reno v. ACLU
Year: Argued 1997 ; Decided 1997
Result: 9-0 in favor of ACLU
Related Constitutional Issue/ Amendment: 1st Amendment dealing with speech, press, and assembly
Civil Rights or Civil Liberties: Civil Liberties
Significance/ Precedent: The court held that the Communications Decency Act violated the 1st Amendment because to a content-based blanket restriction of free speech violated it. The act did clearly define "indecent"communications, limit its restrictions to particular times or individuals, provide supportive statements from an authority on the unique nature of internet communications, or demonstrate that the transmission of "offensive" material is devoid of any social value.
Quote from Majority Opinion: “At issue is the constitutionality of two statutory provisions enacted to protect minors from "indecent" and "patently offensive" communications on the Internet. Notwithstanding the legitimacy and importance of the congressional goal of protecting children from harmful materials, we agree with the three-judge District Court that the statute abridges "the freedom of speech" protected by the First Amendment.”
6-Word Summary: regulation of the constitutional is unconstitutional
Year: Argued 1997 ; Decided 1997
Result: 9-0 in favor of ACLU
Related Constitutional Issue/ Amendment: 1st Amendment dealing with speech, press, and assembly
Civil Rights or Civil Liberties: Civil Liberties
Significance/ Precedent: The court held that the Communications Decency Act violated the 1st Amendment because to a content-based blanket restriction of free speech violated it. The act did clearly define "indecent"communications, limit its restrictions to particular times or individuals, provide supportive statements from an authority on the unique nature of internet communications, or demonstrate that the transmission of "offensive" material is devoid of any social value.
Quote from Majority Opinion: “At issue is the constitutionality of two statutory provisions enacted to protect minors from "indecent" and "patently offensive" communications on the Internet. Notwithstanding the legitimacy and importance of the congressional goal of protecting children from harmful materials, we agree with the three-judge District Court that the statute abridges "the freedom of speech" protected by the First Amendment.”
6-Word Summary: regulation of the constitutional is unconstitutional