Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition — Thomas, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Thomas concurred in the judgment, agreeing that the government's current rationale does not justify the Child Pornography Prevention Act's broad reach but suggesting regulation may be permissible if technology advances and narrower restrictions or affirmative defenses are used. Chief Justice Rehnquist dissented, arguing the statute should be upheld under a narrowing construction, and Justice O'Connor concurred in part, contending the ban on virtual child pornography should stand. The majority opinion, not provided here, concluded that specific CPPA provisions violated the First Amendment due to overbreadth and vagueness.