In Philadelphia yesterday, a panel of federal judges issued the first major ruling on free speech on the internet. The decision blocked enforcement of the Communications Decency Act, a new law banning indecent material on the web. Paul DeRienzo reports.

Paul DeRienzo: “The availability of vast amounts of pornographic materials on the net, and the ease with which children outstrip their parents’ knowledge of the medium, prompted congressional conservatives and liberals alike to attempt to extend laws banning so-called indecent speech on the internet. Indecent materials are normally protected by the First Amendment, but in some cases, such as radio and television broadcasting, those protections have been weakened in the interest of protecting children. One of the arguments made by supporters of the CDA is that children are more sophisticated than parents when using computers, and therefore parents need the government to step in. But in their decision, the judges wrote, as chaos is the strength of the internet, chaos and unfettered speech are the strength of liberty. In New York City, the American Civil Liberties Union, which played a leading role in challenging the law, held a news conference to praise the judge’s decision. ACLU head Ira Glasser says proponents of the CDA forget today’s children are tomorrow’s parents, and the First Amendment is part of their heritage, as well.”

Ira Glasser: “We could not have tolerated a law which made it a crime for Barnes & Nobles to put no books on their shelves except those that were suitable for children, and for the government to decide, to boot, what was suitable for children. That problem has existed before the internet. It will exist before the — after the internet. And as far as the kids being more sophisticated, well, maybe that’s true for this generation. But the kids who are sophisticated today will be the parents tomorrow. And they will be just as sophisticated and have just as sophisticated technology. And this is a decision and this is a medium that’s going to last for more than one generation. It’s a bogus issue. It’s been a bogus issue from the beginning. This was a political stunt, and the court has exposed it as such.”

Paul DeRienzo: “Opponents of the CDA admit there’s a lot of offensive material available on the internet, but they say laws already exist prohibiting child pornography and hardcore obscenity. But a spokesperson for the conservative Family Research Council, Kristen Hanson, says the panel of judges were too liberal.”

Kristen Hanson: “It’s kind of like leaving a loaded gun in a playground. And what else should we expect? The panel was handpicked by the ACLU. It’s a sweeping, radical decision, and that allows adults to knowingly send and display pornography to minors on the internet. But we do think that it will be overturned, either by the Supreme Court or the full court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.”

Paul DeRienzo: “If the injunction goes to the Supreme Court, a decision could come by this time next year. For Pacifica Network News, I’m Paul DeRienzo in New York.”