[Aerich]

Ah, Whackmeister, did you get frenzied by the title of that article and just skim the rest of it? I got from the article that an anti-porn access (not necessarily child porn) law was too broad for the court's liking. The law has not been shot down entirely, but will be examined again in a lower court. Here's an excerpt from the article:

"In considering the issue a third time, the court did not end a long fight, however. The majority voted to send the case back to a lower court for a trial that could give the government a chance to prove the law does not go too far."

Free speech is an important issue. I know that porn is not precisely what democracies wish to protect, but the intention is to prevent arguments that could be used to limit expressions that are closer to the "core" of free speech. And before bashing the US too harshly on this one, take a look at how the Supreme Court of Canada has dealt with this area. Check out the recent Charter challenges to section 2, the right to freedom of expression. Our courts are very careful not to make any sweeping statements that could serve as precedent. Typically, WE have a similarly cautious approach to the problem, and we too, DO NOT condone child pornography.

If you want links to the Canadian cases, I can provide them.

[ 06-29-2004, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: Aerich ]