Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (March 14, 1997)
1997 SUE TIDB ALL AWARD FOR CREATIVE HUMANITY HONORS: Shirley Baugher de Colmenares Julia Hagemeier Sheri Hastings Viet Hoang Velma Peter Teresa Phillips Norman Schneider Bill Shepard Pat Tetreault Susan Voss Martin Williams II AWARD CELEBRATION & RECEPTION SUNDAY, MARCH 16 7:00 PM St. Mark's Episcopal Church 1309 R Street Celebrative Music & Entertainment PUBLIC INVITED . I t [• I . '■i Decency Act hearings begin Critics say Exon Amendment is unconstitutional By Jim Goodwin Staff Reporter James Exon may be finished in the U.S. Senate, but a review of one of his final legislative measures munications Decency Act — is just getting under way in the U.S. Supreme Court. ' The court will begin hearing argu ments Wednesday as to the; constitu tionality of the act, also ta®^n.a$the Exon Amendment. The act makes it a crime, punish able by up to two years in prison and/ or a $250,000 fine, for anyone to en gage in speech that is “indecent” or “patently offensive” on an “interactive computer service” that could be viewed by a minor. But a temporary restraining order, granted by a Philadelphia federal judge seven days after the bill’s enactment on Feb. 8,1996, hasprohibited the the act’s enforcement. That could change this summer if the Supreme Court rules — after an anticipated three months of delibera tion — in favor of the Exon Amend ment. The road to court The court will hear oral arguments beginning Wednesday. It will open Reno vs. American Civil Liberties Union, which is the federal government’s appeal to a Philadelphia federal court’s decision stating that the Communications Decency Act is un constitutional. tixon anticipated legal cnanenges to his amendment, and wrote into the act a direct link to the Supreme Court from federal district court level. Nor mally, an intermediary U.S. Court of Appeals would hear a trial before it could be appealed to the Supreme Court. The Philadelphia case was a con solidation of two such legal challenges — ACLU vs. Reno and American Li brary Association vs. Department of Justice — filed against the new law within weeks of its enactment. Altogether, 50 individuals, organi zations and for-profit and not-for profit corporations signed on as plain tiffs in the trial. On June 12,1996, the three judges presiding over the consolidated trial unanimously ruled in favor of those plaintiffs, finding the act unconstitu tional. The federal government filed an appeal to the decision two weeks later, paving the way for the Supreme Court showdown. Drawing lines Critics like Matt LeMieux, execu tive director of the Nebraska chapter of the ACLU, said he hoped the ob jections raised by the Philadelphia trial plaintiffs will persuade Supreme Court justices to keep the original ruling in tact. 66 The courts can say the act is constitu tional or isn't and say why. Then the leg islators can go back and rewrite the origi nal statute." I' James Exon former U.S. senator While the decency act may have been well-intended, it also was ill-con ceived and illegal, LeMieux said. “It would be an incredible step backwards if the Exon Amendment were upheld,” LeMieux said. “It’s pretty simple. Go ahead and read the First Amendment: ‘Congress shall make no law...’” Such contentions aren’t new to Exon, who said he’s heard them all before. “These same types of opponents use similar arguments when the court hears other First Amendment cases,” Nebraska’s former senior senator said. “The attack that they make is a stan dard blanketed attack they always make. “The act is aimed at protecting minors only, and leaves adults to their own vices.” Specific criticisms about the Exon Amendment have plagued the act since President Bill Clinton signed it into law as part of the Telecommuni cations Reform Act of 1996. The de cency act’s parent bill partially deregu lated the telecommunications industry. Leading cnucs, sucn as me allu, say the decency act is unconstitution ally over-broad and vague because it doesn’t define “indecent” or “patently offensive.” They also say the act’s “in teractive computer service” phrase le gally could be construed to constitute as few as two linked computers, a likely network size for small busi nesses and homes. John Bender, a University of Ne braska-Lincoln professor of commu nications law, said the act’s indecent speech ban had no legal precedents, a fact the Supreme Court would closely study. “The law would probably have to be narrowed,” Bender said. “Histori cally, indecent speech has only been restricted for broadcast and minors.” LeMieux said that while the act could limit children’s Internet access to pornography, as was Exon’s inten tion, it also would eliminate legitimate topics of Internet discussion intended for adults. Banned subjects conceivably could include sex education, gay and lesbian rights and birth control issues, LeMieux said. “I don’t see any other way you could craft this bill where the govern ment wasn’t interfering with the legiti mate activities of adults,” LeMieux said. “It’s outrageous.” Backing up Exon said the scenario is not only conceivable; it’s already occurred. He cited as proof Sable Communi cations of California vs. Federal Com munications Commission, a 1989 case in which the Supreme Court ruled that a ban on offering sexually-oriented prerecorded telephone messages vio lated the First Amendment. The court said the statute was un constitutional because its denial of adult access to such messages far ex ceeded the compelling interest of pre venting minors from being exposed to the messages. In the FCC’s favor, the court also ruled that the ban didn’t unconstitution ally prohibit the interstate transmission of such “dial-a-pom” messages. Exon said Congress gladly ac cepted the latter portion of the ruling, and altered the statute’s other require ments to bring it into compliance with the Constitution. Exon said he believed the Supreme Court’s decision on the Communica tions Decency Act could net similar results, in which case his former col leagues similarly would rewrite the portions found unconstitutional. “The courts can say the act is con stitutional or isn’t and say why. Then the legislators can go back and rewrite the original statute,” Exon said. “The people who are challenging this law are ignoring the previous legislation preventing minors from getting to por nography.” Minor problem Bender said an often-overlooked compromise might exist between the decency act’s supporters and opponents. Given proper technology, gatekeeping software could limit mi nors’ access to potentially offensive material, Bender said. The devices — at least their proto types — already exist in the form of blocking and filtering programs, such as CYBERsitter and SurfWatch, Bender said. “It’s conceivable that those provid ing potentially offensive material could ‘tag’ that material to block it,” Bender said. “How technologically feasible that would be, I don’t know, but as a requirement by law, I think it’s possible.” The Daily Nebraskan is now accepting applications for senior positions major field and class standing is eligible, as long as you are carrying at least six x a 2.0 GPA or higher. Positions are: Managing Editor, Associate News Editor, Assignment / Supplements Editor, Design Chief, Sports Editor, A&E Editor, Opinion Editor, Copy Desk Chief, Art Director, Photo Director, Web Editor, Assistant Web Editor, Senior Reporters, Cartoonist, Senior Photographer, Copy Editors, Columnists Pick up an application, job description and sign up for an interview at the Daily Nebraskan Nebraska Union. Applications are due March 21. Interviews will begin March 31. And don't Torget, applications for current staff positions are always accepted. UNL does not discriminate in its academic, admission or employment programs and abides by all federal regulations regarding the same.