Your fact-checks will appear here
A Supreme Court case that removed child pornography from First Amendment protection when real children are involved
law draws a firm line between sexual depictions involving real children—which the has treated as unprotected child pornography—and purely fictional or animated sexual content, which is regulated prima...
U.S. courts have long drawn a line between protected speech and criminal content—routinely holding that child pornography is unprotected and that possession or viewing can be criminalized—yet the mate...
Federal and appellate courts have grappled with whether fictional depictions of minors can be prosecuted as obscene, producing a mixed record: the upheld a conviction for obscene written and pictorial...
The in v. struck down parts of the that criminalized “virtual child pornography” — images that appear to depict minors but were produced without using real children — holding that those provisions wer...