3 ms·

This is a clear violation of the first amendment, right?

• hyperpape 6y ago
  There is a lot of case law surrounding obscenity, and courts have ruled that bans on obscenity do not necessarily violate the first amendment (there are a variety of tests involved). The rationale never seemed sound to me, but somehow I have not been appointed to the Supreme Court. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_obscenity_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_obscenity_law
  • ceejayoz 6y ago
    It's unlikely these filters will ban only a subset of pornography that qualifies as obscenity, though.
• munk-a 6y ago
  It might be a violation of the first amendment, but I think that'd be unlikely. Access to such is already heavily restricted based on the viewers age and the content (including the actors age) and that seems to be generally socially acceptable. I think that the "important" part of the first amendment is usually focused on government control of speech that is made in opposition to the government, this doesn't appear to violate that in any way so I'd guess that the supreme court would probably be okay with this law from a purely first amendment perspective. A more applicable law would seem to be Article 1 Section 8 (the interstate commerce clause) but that is also pretty weak - I believe that certain states already have widely differing views on adult content so even that might not stand up.