I’m amazed this is legal in the first place. Is it possible that prior laws regarding children fell under a protected category of “art”? Either way, I think we all agree that this law is a good law for society.
The Supreme Court struck down a similar law in 2002. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234. The Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 prohibited “any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture” that “is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct”.
I haven’t seen or read the language of this Louisiana law, and presumably intelligent law-makers would be aware that a law with a similar intent has been ruled unconstitutional, so maybe they changed enough so that this one will hold up.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
English
Excuse me doing WHAT
I’m amazed this is legal in the first place. Is it possible that prior laws regarding children fell under a protected category of “art”? Either way, I think we all agree that this law is a good law for society.
No, they’re a 10,000 year old vampire /s
The Supreme Court struck down a similar law in 2002. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234. The Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 prohibited “any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture” that “is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct”.
I haven’t seen or read the language of this Louisiana law, and presumably intelligent law-makers would be aware that a law with a similar intent has been ruled unconstitutional, so maybe they changed enough so that this one will hold up.