With its ruling in
Reno v. ACLU in 1997, the Supreme Court invalidated a federal law passed to protect minors from indecent and patently offensive communications via the Internet. What was the Courts rationale in its invalidation of the federal law?
a. The Internet is impossible to police.
b. To restrict Internet speech in the United States would also restrict it in other countries.
c. In denying minors access to potentially harmful speech, the law suppressed a large amount of speech that adults have a constitutional right to receive.
d. The Internet has no standard group or vehicle by which to define decency, much less to enforce the standard.
e. Control of Internet speech is a role for the state governments, not the federal government.
Question -2-Which of the following is NOT a part of the SLAPS test?
a. serious literary value
b. artistic value
c. political value
d. scientific value
e. serious historical value
Question -3-Miller v. California (1973) created a modern legal test for determining what sexually explicit materials may be subject to regulation under the Constitution. Which of the following is NOT part of the conditions that must be met?
a. The average person would think that the work as a whole appeals to prurient interest.
b. The work depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way.
c. The work as a whole lacks serious literary or artistic value.
d. Specific sections of the work are considered patently offensive.
e. The SLAPS test
Question -4-In very limited cases, the courts may impose a limit on publication before certain material has actually been published, based on the argument that the material will be libelous if published. This order not to publish is called
a. judicial censorship.
b. cease and desist.
c. prior restraint.
d. judicial discretion.
e. libel diversion.
Quick Reply
