cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-06-21 - Re: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws

Header Data

From: Mac Norton <mnorton@cavern.uark.edu>
To: Steve Schear <azur@netcom.com>
Message Hash: 5238ab80ed8e6ac718468fa0eaa2d76036ff4919f79ad397849db46af174d3c7
Message ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.970620182926.6841B-100000@cavern.uark.edu>
Reply To: <v03102802afd0a943ff87@[10.0.2.15]>
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-21 00:24:14 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:24:14 +0800

Raw message

From: Mac Norton <mnorton@cavern.uark.edu>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:24:14 +0800
To: Steve Schear <azur@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
In-Reply-To: <v03102802afd0a943ff87@[10.0.2.15]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.970620182926.6841B-100000@cavern.uark.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Steve Schear wrote:

> >But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's
> >Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law
> >violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to
> >wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the
> >Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that
> >she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike
> >down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's
> >ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside
> >their borders.
> 
> Might this also mean that states attempting to restrict Internet gaming
> might similarly be restrained?

Not necessarily, and that's ilustrative of one of the problems with this
decision on Commerce Clause grounds.  Is child porn, like other articles
of "commerce", generic across state lines, or is it subject to a Miller
"community standard"?  Same for the "harmful to minors" standard?
MacN

Thread