American Constitutionalism in Historical Perspective (packet)

Internet: Reno v. ACLU, 1996 (overbreadth analysis): ACLU protested reg of porn material on the Internet. Court strikes down reg that’s enacted to protect minors from indecent/offensive comm. on the Internet b/c total ban. D/n want to hamper growth of Internet w/ stifling reg—like a public forum. D/n want to limit the level of discourse in this ultimate public forum to the level of a child.

1. 
   Narrows the application of Pacifica by noting that radio is a scarce media with a history of regulation, whereas the Internet is international with no central regulatory authority. Notes overbreadth of regulation, would prohibit parent sending contraceptive info to child.
   
2. 
   O’Connor dissent: transmission of sexually explicit message from an adult to a child w/ knowledge should still be prohibited. Reasonable b/c it fits with laws against child pornography and abuse.
   

COPA; made criminal knowingly communicating for commercial purposes any material that is available to minors and is harmful to them, ie. graphic porn. Affirmative defenses were req use of access codes, credit cards, digital certificate verifying age, etc. Struck down in Ashcroft (2004) b/c govt didn’t satisfy its burden of least restrictive alternative. This involves censorship and if parents can assert control over child’s viewing thru blocking and filtering, then d/n involve the state and serves parental rts better

1. 
   UNPROTECTED SPEECH: ADVERTISING
   
   1. 
      Background: Distinguish door to door solicitation, individuals can put up signs requesting no solicitations, but the state can’t stop people from coming to the door. (Jehovah’s witnesses- Martin v. Struthers). Though individuals can forbid magazine solicitations, distinguishing b/w religious and commercial purposes, generally disallow objections to commercial and professional advertising. The court has become more aggressive in this area, now unanimous that any prohibitions in this area will be per se unconstitutional. (Central Hudson).
      
      1. 
         Times v. Sullivan: viewed as political rather than commercial so in core of protected speech.
         
      2. 
         Pittsburgh Press: commercial speech unprotected.
         
      3. 
         Bigelow: court said ad about abortion was constitutionally protected, though not clear if protecting as commercial or political speech.
         
   2.