Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (SCOTUS 1997)

Summary

Justice Stevens, writing for seven Justices, held that the Communications Decency Act's restrictions on indecent and patently offensive Internet communications violated the First Amendment because their vague, content-based prohibitions suppressed substantial protected adult speech and were not narrowly tailored to protecting minors. The Court affirmed the preliminary injunction without deciding the Fifth Amendment vagueness claim, severed “or indecent” from § 223(a), and rejected further judicial narrowing. Justice O'Connor, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, concurred in the judgment in part and dissented in part. She agreed that the display prohibition and restrictions burdening communications among adults were unconstitutional under existing technology, but would have sustained the transmission and specific-person provisions when the sender knew that all recipients were minors.

Holding

Constitutionality of the CDA's content-based restrictions on Internet speech.. The challenged indecency and patently offensive communication prohibitions violated the First Amendment; the Internet's characteristics did not justify reduced First Amendment scrutiny.

Whether statutory qualifications and defenses cured the burden on protected speech.. The knowledge and specific-person requirements, alternative communication channels, and affirmative defenses did not cure the statute's unconstitutional breadth.

Severability and judicial narrowing of the challenged provisions.. The words “or indecent” were severable from § 223(a), preserving its prohibition of obscenity, but the challenged provisions could not otherwise be saved through severance or limiting construction.

Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities

Cited by