Statute Barring Certain Speech Related to Child Pornography Did Not Violate First Amendment, Due Process Clause

摘要

In 2002, the US Supreme Court found a federal statutory provision criminalizing the possession and distribution of material pandered as child pornography, regardless of whether it actually was child pornography, to be facially overbroad. [Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U. S. 234 (US Sup. Ct. 2002).] Congress then passed a pandering and solicitation provision [18 U. C. § 2252A(a)(3)(B)]. In the instant case [United States v. Williams, No. 06-694 (US Sup. Ct. 5/19/08)], the respondent Williams pleaded guilty to this offense and others, but reserved the right to challenge his pandering convictions constitutionality. The district court rejected his challenge, but the Eleventh Circuit reversed, finding the statute both overbroad under the First Amendment and impermis-sibly vague under the Due Process Clause.