WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court explored Tuesday whether it could limit the reach of a child pornography law so that it would not apply to legitimate creative expression, vivid adolescent imaginations or innocent e-mails with provocative headings.
The court took up a challenge to a provision of a 2003 federal law that sets a five-year mandatory prison term for promoting child porn. Opponents have said the law could apply to movies such as “Traffic” or “Titanic” that depict adolescent sex.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the provision, saying it makes a crime out of merely talking about illegal images or possessing innocent materials that someone else might believe is pornography.
Justice Stephen Breyer wondered whether dirty pictures that get passed around at school could fall under the law. “It’s kind of schoolboy behavior, and they’re showing this stuff around, not totally certain what it is. Suddenly that can become a federal crime,” Breyer said.
Solicitor General Paul Clement, the Bush administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer, urged the court to consider those challenges on a case-by-case basis, but not to endorse the appeals court decision that said the law is unconstitutional. A decision is expected by spring.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
