People v. Austin

Summary

The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the dismissal of the charge and held that the statute prohibiting intentional, nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images is facially constitutional. The court construed the statute as a content-neutral privacy regulation subject to intermediate scrutiny, which the statute satisfied because it serves a substantial privacy interest and is narrowly tailored. The court also rejected facial overbreadth and vagueness challenges, concluding that the statute's limiting elements provide adequate notice and do not prohibit a substantial amount of protected speech.