Washington – The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider reviving part of a new federal law that makes it a crime to send computer messages that offer child pornography, even when no pornography exists.
Last year, a federal appeals court in Atlanta struck down that provision on free-speech grounds and said it reached too far. The judges said the law could be read to make it illegal for a grandparent to send a message that said, “Good pics of kids in bed,” when he was referring to innocent photos of his grandchildren in their pajamas.
But Justice Department lawyers said that example itself is far-fetched and should not stand in the way of a needed measure.
The court voted to hear the government’s appeal, but arguments will not be heard until fall.
This is only the latest in a series of legal disputes over how to combat child pornography without infringing on the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment.
Five years ago, the court struck down part of the anti-pornography law that extended to computer-generated images. Since no children were involved in creating these images, they could not be prohibited by law, the justices said.
The next year, Congress passed a revised law. One provision was targeted at computer users who offer or solicit child pornography. It says, “Any person who knowingly advertises, promotes, presents, distributes or solicits … a visual depiction” of a child engaged in sex commits a crime, whether or not the material exists.
Justice Department lawyers said this provision has been used “only rarely to date,” but they also said it gives prosecutors an extra weapon for charging would-be traffickers even when the obscene images cannot be located.
Indians’ appeal rejected
Also Monday, the Supreme Court rejected appeals by American Indians to step into a decade-old lawsuit accusing the government of mismanaging more than $100 billion in oil, gas, timber and other royalties from their lands.
The justices declined to disturb an appeals court ruling that removed U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth from the case. The appeals court said Lamberth, who held successive Democratic and Republican Interior Department secretaries in contempt of court, had lost his objectivity in the case.
The court also refused to review an appeals court ruling that reversed Lamberth’s order that the Interior Department disconnect its computers from the Internet for failing to provide adequate security for the Indians’ trust records. The class-action suit, filed in 1996 by Blackfoot Indian Elouise Cobell, deals with individual Indians’ lands. Several tribes have also sued, claiming mismanagement of their lands.
