Court affirms Child Online Protection Act unconstitutional

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia agreed with a lower court ruling that struck down as unconstitutional a 1998 law intended to protect children from sexual material and other objectionable content on the Internet. The decision is the latest twist in a decade-long legal battle over the Child Online Protection Act. The fight has already reached the Supreme Court and could be headed back there. The law, which has not taken effect, would bar Web sites from making harmful content available to minors over the Internet. The act was passed the year after the Supreme Court ruled that another law intended to protect children from explicit material online -- the Communications Decency Act -- was unconstitutional in the landmark case Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union. In yesterday's ruling, the federal appeals court concluded that the Child Online Protection Act is unconstitutionally overly broad and vague. The court also ruled that the law violates the First Amendment because filtering technologies and other parental control tools offer a less restrictive way to protect children from inappropriate content online.

CDT Applauds Appeals Court Ruling In COPA Case
[SOURCE: Center for Democracy & Technology]
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today upheld a lower court ruling striking down the controversial Child Online Protection Act (COPA) that required Web operators to restrict access to large amounts of constitutionally protected speech. COPA placed severe restrictions on a wide range of legal, socially valuable speech, including content relating to sexual identity, health and art. CDT, which has filed friend-of-the-court briefs opposing COPA and supporting parental empowerment technology, applauds the ruling.
CDT Statement on Ruling, July 22, 2008: http://cdt.org/press/20080722press.php
3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Decision in COPA [PDF], July 22, 2008: http://www.cdt.org/speech/20080722COPA3rdCircuit.pdf