ACLU v. Ashcroft, No. 99-1324 (3rd Cir. March 6, 2003)

In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Third Circuit’s ruling in ACLU v. Ashcroft that the Child Online Protection Act’s (COPA) use of "contemporary community standards" to identify material harmful to minors violates the First Amendment. Holding that reliance on community standards does not "by itself" render the statute substantially overbroad, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the Third Circuit for consideration of other grounds on which COPA might be unconstitutional. In a lengthy opinion, the appellate court has ruled that COPA fails to pass constitutional muster on two grounds: (1) strict scrutiny, and (2) overbreadth. Addressing the district court’s preliminary injunction against enforcement of COPA, the Third Circuit agreed that, while the federal government had enunciated a compelling state interest for the law, i.e., "protecting the physical and psychological well-being of minors," COPA’s provisions defining "material harmful to minors" and "commercial purposes" and dealing with "affirmative defenses" available to publishers are not narrowly tailored to achieve this compelling interest. In addition, COPA does not employ "the least restrictive means" to effect the government’s interest. As a result, the court ruled that COPA fails to satisfy two of the three prongs of the strict scrutiny test. Turning to the question of overbreadth, the court concluded that the COPA is overbroad because its provisions place significant burdens on Web publishers’ dissemination of constitutionally protected speech and on adults’ ability to access such speech.

ACLU v. Ashcroft, No. 99-1324 (3rd Cir. March 6, 2003)

Full opinion: http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/recentop/week/991324.pdf

Eschool News article: http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/showStoryalert.cfm?ArticleID=4302