Censorship
Censorship | Federal Regulation of Internet Pornography Is Unconstitutional
Charles Levendosky is the editor of the Casper (Wyoming) Star-Tribune and a noted commentator on First Amendment issues. In the following viewpoint, Levendosky argues that the Child Online Protection Act (COPA)—a law passed by Congress in late 1998 to prevent children from being exposed to pornography online—is unconstitutional. The First Amendment prohibits Congress from passing any law censoring free speech, and yet, Levendosky maintains, this is exactly what COPA does. Furthermore, he contends that limiting the Internet only to material that does not offend children places an...
[The entire page is 1212 words long]
Navigate
- Introduction
-
Chapter 1: Should the Right to Free Speech Be Restricted?
- Government Censorship Would Benefit Society
- Speech Should Not Be Restricted
- Hate Speech Should Be Banned
- Hate Speech Should Not Be Banned
- Flag Desecration Should Be Banned
- Flag Desecration Should Not Be Banned
- The Free Speech Rights of Abortion Protesters Should Be Restricted
- The Free Speech Rights of Abortion Protesters Should Not Be Restricted
-
Chapter 2: Should Pornography Be Censored?
- Pornography Should Be Censored
- Pornography Should Not Be Censored
- The Federal Government Can Regulate Internet Pornography
- Federal Regulation of Internet Pornography Is Unconstitutional
- Internet Pornography Should Have Its Own Domain
- A Separate Domain for Internet Pornography Would Violate Free Speech
- Chapter 3: Should Schools and Libraries Practice Censorship?
- Chapter 4: Should the Arts and Entertainment Industries Be Censored?
- Organizations to Contact
- Bibliography
- Copyright
Tell a friend about Censorship at eNotes.
