Case Status

5 results

ASHCROFT, ATTY. GEN., ET AL. v. FREE SPEECH COALITION (19568)

    Order dated: 01/22/01
    Docket number: 00-795
    Action:
        The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted.

ASHCROFT, ATTY. GEN., ET AL. v. FREE SPEECH COALITION (19568)

    Order dated: 03/19/01
    Docket number: 00-795
    Action:
        The motion of Morality in Media, Inc., for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The motion of Sam Brownback, et al., for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted.

ASHCROFT, ATTY. GEN., ET AL. v. FREE SPEECH COALITION (19568)

    Order dated: 04/30/01
    Docket number: 00-795
    Action:
        The motion of National Center for Missing & Exploited Children for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The motion of National Law Center for Children and Families, et al., for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted.

ASHCROFT, ATTY. GEN., ET AL. v. FREE SPEECH COALITION (19568)

    Order dated: 05/14/01
    Docket number: 00-795
    Action:
        The motion of National Legal Foundation for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted.

ASHCROFT, ATTY. GEN., ET AL. v. FREE SPEECH COALITION (19568)

    Order dated: 09/07/01
    Docket number: 00-795
    Action:
        The motions of the Solicitor General to dispense with printing the joint appendices are granted.

A description of the questions presented by the case has been prepared:

The Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996, prohibits, interalia, the shipment, distribution, receipt, reproduction, sale, or possession of any visual depiction that appears to be of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct. 18 U.S.C. 2252A, 2252A, 2256(8)(B) (Supp. IV 1998). It also contains a similar prohibition concerning any visual depiction that is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct. 18 U.S.C. 2252A, 2256(8)(D) (Supp. IV 1998). The question presented is whether those prohibitions violate the First Amendment to the Constitution.

An opinion has been handed down: