Your fact-checks will appear here
A standard for determining whether material is obscene, used in US courts.
A recent federal district court dismissed a possession charge tied to wholly AI‑generated obscene images, finding Section 1466A unconstitutional as applied to private possession of virtual CSAM—invoki...
Text-only sexual writing that depicts minors is treated far more permissively under U.S. law and constitutional doctrine than visual depictions: federal statutes and precedent focus criminal liability...
Most authoritative statutes aimed at operate at the federal level and target visual depictions, while states vary and rarely criminalize purely written or fictional narratives about minors except wher...
Federal law defines “” for images of minors through a mix of statutory categories and judicially applied tests: the statutory definition in 18 C. §2256 enumerates particular kinds of conduct (intercou...
courts and commentators show a narrow set of defenses that have had measurable success against prosecutions for : First Amendment challenges rooted in , obscenity‑test attacks under , and factual or p...
courts have repeatedly confronted whether criminal laws can reach “virtual” —anime, manga or drawn depictions often called lolicon—and the answers are mixed: and several federal judges have struck dow...
carry many of the same baseline legal risks as professionally produced adult content—most notably laws against sharing non‑consensual material, , and —but they lack the compliance scaffolding (contrac...
A small set of headline cases and doctrinal tests have shaped whether filmed consensual fetish acts fall outside First Amendment protection, but most litigation has split along two lines: U.S. courts ...