Civil Liberties In The U.S. Internet Censorship example essay topic

Daniel Grodzki Criminal Justice Internet Censorship The issue at hand here is whether or not Internet censorship is legal. Some say that there are always two sides to every story. In circumstances like these none of the sides are or wrong. Internet censorship is a relatively new issue, but before getting into a discussion about it, one must find out how it all came about. The World Wide Web, as we know, it was released by CERN, in 1991. CERN is a particle physics laboratory based in Europe.

The Internet grew at a very rapid rate from that time on, to the point were it has become an essential part in our society. Internet censorship is a very serious issue and the cause of a great deal of controversy. The problem is that many people believe that all 'offensive' material should be banned. One reason for this is to prevent a child from viewing it and being potentially harmed by it. But that's just the ethical side of the argument. Another reason for Internet censorship has to do with dangerous and harmful material being given out to anyone with a computer.

Since it's relatively easy for somebody to find instructions on how to make a bomb, steal people's credit card accounts, and hack into another person's computer, which are all illegal acts and frowned upon by the criminal justice system. The argument against Internet censorship is mainly that it violates the highest law in the land, the United States Constitution. The Internet, as any other form of media, has protection under the 1st Amendment. However, the government does censor certain material, such as child pornography. (CERN 2003, American Civil Liberties Union 2003) There are many groups that fight hard against Internet censorship. One of these groups, the most influential of them, is called the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The ACLU is a large organization that fights for civil liberties in the U.S. Internet censorship is only of the issues that this organization has interests in. It is a non-profit, non-partisan organization and is supported by annual dues and contributions from its members, as well as grants from certain private foundations and individuals. It does not receive any government funding at all. The ACLU was founded in 1920 and has since grown to over 300,000 members and supporters and is active in national and state capitals in all fifty states. The ACLU has appeared numerous times in front of the Supreme Court and other federal courts on many occasions, to defend its clients. These clients are ordinary people who feel that they have had their constitutional rights violated.

The ACLU's national headquarters are located in New York City. (American Civil Liberties Union 2003) The decision making bodies that are targeted by the ACLU are Congress and the Supreme Court. Whenever there is a potential law being passed that will limit civil liberties; the ACLU petitions Congress and if that does not succeed then it brings its case to the Supreme Court. The goals of the ACLU are to ensure that there are no laws or acts passed that would limit civil liberties.

In my opinion, I think that the ACLU is doing a great job. I definitely think that it is all about helping people who have had their civil liberties violated and protecting the rights of citizens as well. Personally, I'm against Internet censorship because I think it violates the First Amendment of the Constitution. (American Civil Liberties Union 2003) In the other corner of the ring, in this heated debate, is the Christian Coalition of America. Founded in 1989, it is a public organization with nearly two million members and 1,500 local chapters in all fifty states.

It receives funding from contributions from its members. The Christian Coalition achieves its goals through speaking out in public areas and the media. During the 200 o elections its members passed out 70 million voter guides to inform pro-family voters about important issues and legislation. The Christian Coalition is driven by a strong belief that people of faith have a right as well as a responsibility to be involved in the world around them. Internet censorship is only one of the goals of this group. Other goals include easing tax burdens on families, protecting young people and communities from pornography, defending the institution of marriage, protecting religious freedom, returning education to local and parental control, and strengthening the family, among other things.

The national headquarters is located in Washington, D.C. (The Christian Coalition 2003) The Christian Coalition basically deals with any issue that involves the family as a whole. They target local councils, school boards, state legislatures, and Congress. Most of the members are Christians that go to church regularly and who have families. They also have numerous pastors and priests, as well as lawyers who work to further the cause, which is basically "giving Christians a voice in the government".

I think that this is a sincere mission and that they are really dedicated to completing it. (The Christian Coalition 2003) The ACLU brings its case to the government by fighting any law that is proposed that might inhibit civil liberties. It also provides lawyers help in cases that involve this type of thing. In a landmark 1997 ruling, Reno vs. ACLU, the Supreme Court found that the statute that sought to censor speech on the Internet was unconstitutional. Recently two lawsuits were brought up against an act that required all public libraries to use filtering software programs to block certain obscene images, in order to continue receiving funds. The ACLU represented the plaintiffs and the cases were consolidated and, as required by the statute, were tried in front of a special three-judge court.

The three-judge court unanimously ruled that the statute was unconstitutional. (American Civil Liberties Union 2003) Most laws passed that concern censorship on the Internet are found to be unconstitutional, for example, ACLU vs. Miller. In this case the ACLU successfully struck down a Georgia state law which made it illegal to communicate anonymously or using a pseudonym on the Internet and to create links to websites that use trademarks, trade names, or logos. In a precedent setting case, ALA vs. Pataki, the court struck down a New York State online law because it violated the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, which prohibits states from regulating speech if it's outside their own borders.

Another case was Urofsky vs. Allen, in which a Virginia law was struck down. This particular law made it illegal for all state employees, including university professors, from using computers that are owned by the state to access or transmit sexually explicit material over the Internet. (American Civil Liberties Union 2003) The Christian Coalition publishes newsletters and sends the letters to members of Congress. They also actively lobby Congress and the White House on various types of issues, hold grassroots training schools all over the country, host events in Washington and organize community activities facing issues in regards to their local government. (The Christian Coalition 2003) The Christian Coalition of America works hard to further its goals. For example, Christian Coalition member Congressman Henry Brown (R-SC) proposed the Child Pornography Constitutional Amendment, H.J. Resolution 106.

This resolution makes illegal, "any visual depictions by any technological means of minor persons, whether action or virtual, engaged in explicit sexual activity". The reason for this is because the CC believes that there is a connection between what child pornography offenders see on the Internet and the other types of media and the crimes they commit. Since this resolution has been proposed, 36 Representatives, both Republican and Democratic, have signed it. Another major issue that the Christian Coalition of America has been fighting for was the recent ruling in the United States of America vs. Multnomah County Library and United States vs. American Library Association. In these cases it was found unconstitutional to use blocking software programs in public libraries because it also blocked out certain sites that were not 'obscene' and by doing so had many more negative effects that it did positive. (The Christian Coalition 2003) Despite what the Supreme Court has ruled, states are busy formulating their own censorship laws.

Since 1995 at least thirteen states have passed legislation. This year, New Mexico, already passed a censorship law, and there are more bills that are pending in ten other states. These state laws threaten online speech because every Internet user has to comply with every state law, or they are risking prosecution if their site is accessed in a certain state that makes it illegal. (American Civil Liberties Union 2003) The process of a bill becoming a law is a lengthy one. First the bill must be introduced into the Senate.

The Senate then holds meetings and discusses the bill. If it is approved by the majority then it then goes into the House of Representatives. The House then must debate and decide whether to accept the bill or not. After the House votes in favor of the bill, it's passed back to the house that proposed it with amendments. Then it goes to the President and he signs it and it becomes a law.

Internet censorship is a big issue that is receiving a lot of attention. It is not a clear cut, right or wrong answer. Censoring the Internet is without a doubt against the First Amendment, but it's also true that it can be harmful and damaging not only to children but all people as well. Where do we draw the line and choose which side to listen to?

In my opinion, the only realistic way to help solve this problem and pleasing both sides is developing some kind of blocking software program that can specifically block 'obscene' material and not block educational websites. For example, existing software of the sort would be programmed to block all sites containing the word "breast". However, this would also rule out sites on breast cancer research, cooking sites that involve chicken breasts, and sex education materials, etc. So if there was a program that can differentiate between which site is using the word in an obscene way and which is not, then the problem would almost be solved. The thing about the Internet is that there is a way to get around anything.

Even if there were some sort of flawless blocking program that pleased both sides, people would still be able to find a way around it and of course when it comes to censorship there is not on thing that someone won't try to ban. I don't think that this issue will ever be fully resolved until all obscene material is banned from the Internet and in my opinion that will never happen. The fact that both sides in this argument are determined to have their way; there will always be a debate about Internet censorship.