Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

United States v. American Library Association

 
US Supreme Court: United States v. American Library Association

539 U. S. 194 (2003). Argued 5 March 2003, decided 23 June 2003 by vote of 6 to 3; Rehnquist for the Court, Kennedy and Breyer concurring, Stevens, Souter, and Ginsburg dissenting. Congress enacted the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) to prevent minors from using public libraries' Internet terminals to access obscene images. CIPA stipulated that public libraries could not receive federal assistance to provide Internet access unless they installed in their terminals software to block websites that purveyed such images.

Under the doctrine that Congress may not induce recipients of federal assistance to perform unconstitutional acts, Chief Justice William Rehnquist argued that public libraries' mission is to provide materials of the greatest benefit to the community; that Internet access in public libraries is not a protected public forum; that adult patrons can easily obtain access to an unblocked terminal by asking a librarian; and that the government is entitled to define the limits of the programs it establishes. From these premises, Rehnquist concluded that CIPA did not induce public libraries to perform unconstitutional acts.

Justice John Paul Stevens dissented on the ground that CIPA impermissibly conditioned receipt of government funding on the restriction of First Amendment rights because CIPA denied the libraries any discretion in judging the merits of the blocked websites.

Justice David Souter, with Ginsburg joining, dissented on the ground that blocking an adult's access to material harmful to minors is constitutionally impermissible content‐based restriction on the communication of material in the library's control. He argued that strict scrutiny ought to have been applied, and that CIPA would fail this test because it was not narrowly enough tailored to achieve the government's compelling interest in protecting minors from accessing obscene images without infringing the fundamental rights of adult library patrons. In Justice Souter's view, CIPA's terms did not ensure that an adult library patron could obtain an unblocked terminal by simply asking.

— T. J. Donahue

Search unanswered questions...
Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics
 
 

 

Copyrights:

US Supreme Court. The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States. Copyright © 1992, 2005 by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.  Read more