The First Amendment and the Internet
In Reno vs ACLU, the Commuinications Decency Act case in 1997, the Supreme Court took up the relatively new phenomenon of the Internet and decided whether the first amemdment applied to it. They found ..
"This dynamic, multifaceted category of communication includes not only traditional print and news services, but also audio, video, and still images, as well as interactive, real time dialogue. Through the use of chat rooms, any person with a phone line can become a town crier with a voice that resonates farther than it could from any soapbox. Through the use of Web pages, mail exploders, and newsgroups, the same individual can become a pamphleteer. As the District Court found, 'the content on the Internet is as diverse as human thought.' 929 F. Supp., at 842 (finding 74). We agree with its conclusion that our cases provide no basis for qualifying the level of First Amendment scrutiny that should be applied to this medium.
The Supreme Court quoted Judge Dalzell in upholding the Third Circuit Court of Appeal's findings.
Judge Dalzell's review of "the special attributes of Internet communication" disclosed by the evidence convinced him that the First Amendment denies Congress the power to regulate the content of protected speech on the Internet. Id., at 867. His opinion explained at length why he believed the Act would abridge significant protected speech, particularly by noncommercial speakers, while "[p]erversely, commercial pornographers would remain relatively unaffected." Id., at 879. He construed our cases as requiring a "medium specific" approach to the analysis of the regulation of mass communication, id., at 873, and concluded that the Internet--as "the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed," id., at 883--is entitled to "the highest protection from governmental intrusion," ibid. 30