Ten years after the passing of the Child Online Protection Act the law has
again been ruled unconstitutional by the courts.
The Third US Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia upheld a 2007 decision
that the Act was overly broad and that parental monitoring software and
filtering software was a better way to protect children.
"For years the government has been trying to thwart freedom of speech on the
internet, and for years the courts have been finding the attempts
unconstitutional," said Chris Hansen, senior staff attorney with the American
Civil Liberties Union First Amendment Working Group.
"The government has no more right to censor the internet than it does books
and magazines."
The Child Online Protection Act was introduced by Bill Clinton in an attempt
to regulate pornography on the internet. It requires commercial sites in the US
not to publish "material harmful to minors".
The court system has consistently ruled that the law violates the First
Amendment and limits free speech.
Do you agree?
Have your say on this article