In one of the most-watched cases of the term, the Supreme Court ruled today in United States v. Williams that a 2003 federal law that criminalizes the pandering or solicitation of child pornography is constitutionally permissible. Specifically, the Court ruled that the statute is not unconstitutionally overbroad under the First Amendment and that it is not impermissibly vague under the Due Process Clause.
Justice Scalia wrote the impressive opinion for the 7-member majority (which included Justices Stevens and Breyer). Justice Souter, joined by Justice Ginsburg, dissented.
In 2002, in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, the Court (by a 6 to 3 vote) had invalidated a previous effort by Congress to suppress the interstate trade in child pornography. Today’s victory owes special thanks to those in Congress—and in the Department of Justice under former Attorney General John Ashcroft—who carefully crafted the provision at issue in response to that ruling. No credit goes to Senator Leahy, who opposed the provision and who wrongly predicted that the Court would invalidate it.
The Court’s holding that “offers to provide or requests to obtain child pornography are categorically excluded from the First Amendment” is very important. If this statute is vigorously enforced, and if the States enact similar laws and enforce them, there’s real potential to drive the traffic in child pornography off the Internet.