Internet Censorship Struck Down Time After Time

The fight against online censorship continues. Time after time internet censorship has been struck down as unconstitutional. Much praise and support for this seemingly endless battle is deserved by the American_Civil_Liberties_Union (ACLU) http://www.aclu.org/ along with other anti-censorship organizations like The National_Coalition_Against_Censorship at http://www.ncac.org/ and Feminists_For_Free_Expression http://www.ffeusa.org/
Here’s a bit of the background on the last decade or so of the repeated BAD FAITH attempts of authoritarian prudes and bigots to censor free expression including nudity despite the Supreme Court decisions noted below holding that the censorship violated the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. This will also be posted as a comment. Hopefully there will be more articles on this blog to follow. What will it take to get the “gatekeepers” to stop censoring us? Why can’t liberty be respected for its own sake? When is Congress going to pass some laws that put teeth in the Bill of Rights and support free expression instead of trying to chisel away at it or look the other way? Here are some of the articles and decisions which affirm the right of free expression (including nudity). So what have your experiences been with censorship?

ACLU_Defends_Free_Speech_On_Line 
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/internet/onlinefreespeech.html    

SUPREME COURT Refuses To Revive Online Censorship Law  (01/21/2009) 
ACLU wins 10-Year Battle To Protect Free Speech  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vNwEfOrbbo   
                                                                                                                                                          
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/internet/38428prs20090121.html                                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                 
ACLU VICTORIOUS IN DEFENSE OF ONLINE FREE SPEECH 
ACLU v.Gonzales:  Joan Walsh of salon.com victorious, 2007  
COURT RULES THAT GOVERNMENT MAY NOT CENSOR THE INTERNET  

                                                                                                                                                
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: Ashcroft v. ACLU in 2004, United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group in 2000, RENO v. ACLU in 1997 http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/ashcroft-v-aclu
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 
Ashcroft, Attorney General v. American Civil Liberties Union et al. 
Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 
No. 03-218. Argued March 2,2004 - Decided June 29, 2004  
The Supreme Court held that the Third Circuit was correct to affirm the District Court’s ruling that enforcement of COPA should be enjoined because the statute likely violates the First Amendment.  
Ashcroft v. ACLU Amended Complaint For Declaratory and Injunctive Relief 
http://www.aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file246_24202.pdf   
                                                                                                                                             
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 
United States et al. v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc., (98-1682) 529 U.S. 803 (2000) 
30 F. Supp. 2d 702, affirmed 
Argued November 30, 1999-Decided May 22, 2000 
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware    
The Supreme Court Ruled that the District Court did not err in holding the Telecommunications Act of 1996 violative of the First Amendment.  
 http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/98-1682.ZS.html                                            
                                                                                                                                      
Supreme Court Rules: Cyberspace Will be Free! ACLU Hails Victory in internet Censorship Challenge (06/26/1997)      
the Supreme Court ruled in Reno v. ACLU that the Federal Communications Decency Act is an unconstitutional restriction on free speech.      
Counsel for the plaintiffs: Ann Beeson, Esq., ACLU Associate Legal Director 
                                                                                                                                               
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 
                           Syllabus                                                                                             
RENO, Attorney General of the United States, et al, v. American Civil Liberties Union et al. 
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania    
No. 96-511 Argued March 19, 1997 — Decided June 26, 1997  
929 F. Supp. 824, affirmed.                       
The Supreme Court Held that The Communications Decency Act’s “indecent transmission” and “patently offensive display” provisions abridge “the freedom of speech” protected by the First Amemndment. Pp. 17-40                                            
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-511.ZS.html                                                                                                                                     
                                        
blog_HOME_page

8 Responses to “Internet Censorship Struck Down Time After Time”

  1. Panty Buns Says:

    The fight against online censorship continues. Time after time internet censorship has been struck down as unconstitutional. Much praise and support for this seemingly endless battle is deserved by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) http://www.aclu.org/ along with other anti-censorship organizations like The National Coalition Against Censorship http://www.ncac.org/ and Feminists For Free Expression http://www.ffeusa.org/
    Here’s a bit of the background on the last decade or so of the repeated BAD FAITH attempts of authoritarian prudes and bigots to censor free expression including nudity despite the Supreme Court decisions noted below holding that the censorship violated the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. This will also be posted as a comment. Hopefully there will be more articles on this blog to follow. What will it take to get the “gatekeepers” to stop censoring us? Will it take an astronomical monetary verdict against them to get their attention? Why does it have to come to that? Why can’t liberty be respected for its own sake? When is Congress going to pass some laws that put teeth in the Bill of Rights and support free expression instead of trying to chisel away at it? Here are some of the articles and decisions which affirm the right of free expression (including nudity). So what have your experiences been with censorship?

    ACLU Defends Free Speech On Line 
    http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/internet/onlinefreespeech.html    

    SUPREME COURT Refuses To Revive Online Censorship Law  (01/21/2009) 
    ACLU wins 10-Year Battle To Protect Free Speech  
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vNwEfOrbbo   
                                                                                                                                                              
    http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/internet/38428prs20090121.html                                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                     
    GOVERNMENT MAY NOT CENSOR THE INTERNET 
    ACLU v. Gonzales:  Joan Walsh of salon.com victorious, 2007  
    http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/internet/29138prs20070322.html  

                                                                                                                                                    
    FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: Ashcroft v. ACLU in 2004, United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group in 2000, RENO v. ACLU in 1997
    http://www.aclu.org/scotus/2003/21064res20030930.html03218/21064res20030930.html 
    SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 
    Ashcroft, Attorney General v. American Civil Liberties Union et al. 
    Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 
    No. 03-218. Argued March 2,2004 - Decided June 29, 2004  
    The Supreme Court held that the Third Circuit was correct to affirm the District Court’s ruling that enforcement of COPA should be enjoined because the statute likely violates the First Amendment.  
    Ashcroft v. ACLU Amended Complaint For Declaratory and Injunctive Relief 
    http://www.aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file246_24202.pdf   
                                                                                                                                                 
    SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 
    United States et al. v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc., (98-1682) 529 U.S. 803 (2000) 
    30 F. Supp. 2d 702, affirmed 
    Argued November 30, 1999-Decided May 22, 2000 
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware    
    The Supreme Court Ruled that the District Court did not err in holding the Telecommunications Act of 1996 violative of the First Amendment.  
     http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/98-1682.ZS.html                                            
                                                                                                                                          
    Supreme Court Rules: Cyberspace Will be Free! ACLU Hails Victory in internet Censorship Challenge (06/26/1997)      
    http://www.aclu.org/scotus/1996/22957prs19970626.html      
    Counsil for the plaintiffs: Ann Beeson, Esq., ACLU Associate Legal Director 
                                                                                                                                                   
    SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 
                               Syllabus                                                                                             
    RENO, Attorney General of the United States, et al, v. American Civil Liberties Union et al. 
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania    
    No. 96-511 Argued March 19, 1997 — Decided June 26, 1997  
    929 F. Supp. 824, affirmed.                       
    The Supreme Court Held that The Communications Decency Act’s “indecent transmission” and “patently offensive display” provisions abridge “the freedom of speech” protected by the First Amemndment. Pp. 17-40                                            
    http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-511.ZS.html                                                                                                                                     
                                            

  2. VanessaS Says:

    You talk a lot about fighting censorship but it seems to me you are too chicken to post anything worth censoring. Where are the panty photos you promised to post of yourself modeling those see-through Nancy King panties? Where are the videos? Women ask you for some entertainment and all I see is pretty standard panty modeling except for your gender and the fact that you only pose modeling the seat of the panties and not the front. What’s the deal with all this big talk and only standard panty modeling in your free panty photos? Is it just that it looks like you want a spanking? What gives? I appreciate you that you oppose censorship and gender based discrimination but I’d prefer some hot photos or action. So far N. Lynn was the only one who said she was disgusted and she sounded like one of those right wing bigots. Where’s the buns?

  3. Mia Says:

    Hey PantyBuns,
    So this is the first post I’m reading on your blog. I hate hate hate “gatekeepers” especially because they presume to know better than I do what I want or need. They think that their sense of morality should be imposed on me and that just galls me especially because they’re very often the ones caught with their panties down doing things they wouldn’t want to be caught doing with people they probably shouldn’t be doing them with. Ridiculous! I’m an adult and have therefore earned the right to use the net as I please, without harming someone. When will they stop, these nincompoops? (PS: I love that word. It’s so precise! Nincompoops = idiots :) )

  4. Panty Buns Says:

    Thank you! Well said.

  5. Marge Says:

    The censorship won’t stop if the hosting companies think censorship helps their profit. Prudes that include the name “family” in the name of their shell advocacy groups don’t speak for the families I know. They use computer generated lists of phantom people spamming the same pro-censorship messages. It won’t be until enough people like me grow weary of their uniformity and lack of creativity AND DROP OUT that they will start paying attention. When it’s too late. Blackballing sucks. FACEBOOK SUCKS. Is anyone listening? Try to get rid af anything that allows “flagging” “report this” “thumbs down” etc.. Didn’t we learn anything from the blackballing of the Joe McCarthy era?

  6. Vanessa Says:

    I guess not.

  7. Panty Buns Says:

    With respect to Facebook and Internet Censorship: According to a Dec. 19, 2008 NY Times.com article Barry Schnitt of Facebook defended the censoring (removal) of breast feeding photos claiming they are unsafe for children. He added that “the photos we act on are almost exclusively brought to our attention by other users who complain”. Apparently Facebook believes women’s bare breasts are obscene and that babies should be blindfolded while breast feeding - this despite numerous rulings to the contrary in States around the country. The Court of Appeals, New York State’s highest Court once ruled that laws prohibiting bare breasts in public were unconstitutional because they are gender discriminatory. There is little controversy about men having their nipples exposed in public.
    I hope readers will feel free to share other reports of of internet censorship whether by Facebook or elsewhere.

  8. Asian Bridal Beauty Says:

    Human Centipede Two is banned by the British Board of Film Censors… guaranteeing no doubt that a lot more people will see it than if they’d just kept quite about it, condemning it to the obscurity that, really, it probably merits. Plus they don’t know what they’re about anyway; they banned the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, for example, and look how passe that is these days…