@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 Sender: •••@••.••• Subject: Re: cr> Is CDA constitutional? In a message dated 96-01-11 21:30:18 EST, you write: >The Communications Decency Act is so far-fetched that I can't imagine any >court upholding its constitutionality. Not to give the pro-censorship >folks any fodder, but can anyone on this list imagine any arguments based >in exisitng doctrine that would support the statute against a First >Amendment challenge? There is a basic flaw in the logic that says that the CDA is unconstitutional. "Constitutionality" is not a toggle, black or white, yes or no, on or off. There are two kinds of "unconstitutionality. "Patent" or facial unconstitutionality, occurs when there is no constitutional way to interpret a given statute. It only occurs rarely. "Latent" or interpretive unconstitutionality, occurs when a statute is interpreted in a manner not consistent with the constitution. Courts will always presume a statute to be constitutional, and rather than rule it unconstitutional, will prescribe certain interpretations. Given the specific intent requirements in the CDA, I doubt it will be ruled patently unconstitutional. Regards, Marshall @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~ Posted by Richard K. Moore (•••@••.•••) Wexford, Ireland Cyber-Rights: http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/nii/cyber-rights/ CyberLib: http://www.internet-eireann.ie/cyberlib Materials may be reposted in their entirety for non-commercial use. ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
