Search results
After being enjoined by a District Court from enforcing the above provisions, except for the one concerning obscenity and its inherent protection against child pornography, Attorney General Janet Reno appealed directly to the Supreme Court as provided for by the Act's special review provisions.
Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union: A law may violate the First Amendment if it is so overly broad that it curtails protected as well as unprotected speech.
American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, unanimously ruling that anti-indecency provisions of the 1996 Communications Decency Act violated the First Amendment 's guarantee of freedom of speech. [1] .
20 cze 2017 · In 1997, the Supreme Court ruled in Reno v. ACLU that the federal Communications Decency Act (CDA) is an unconstitutional restriction on free speech. The landmark ruling affirmed the dangers of censoring what one judge called "the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed."
27 cze 1996 · 06/28/1996 -- Government to Appeal ACLU v. Reno Decision Protecting Free Speech in Cyberspace; ACLU Encouraged by Supreme Court Ruling on Cable. 04/01/1996 -- Barry Steinhardt asks: "Is Cyberspace Free?" ACLU v. Reno Trial Testimony and Transcripts: Gavel to Gavel Coverage.
After making extensive findings of fact, a three judge District Court convened pursuant to the Act entered a preliminary injunction against enforcement of both challenged provisions.
JANET RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL., Appellants v. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, ET AL. No. 96-511 Washington, D.C. Wednesday, March 19, 1997 The above-entitled matter came on for oral argument before the Supreme Court of the United States at 10:06 a.m. APPEARANCES:
