The Free Speech Coalition is demanding that Title VI of House Resolution 4472 be struck because what the bill suggests it will do and what it actually will are different.
At issue is record-keeping. The FSC argues that the complex record-keeping requirements the bill seeks to impose do nothing to eradicate child pornography but instead will hinder and harass legal pornographers.
“If passed into law in anything resembling its current form, (Title VI) would represent an abusive and unconstitutional affront to freedom of speech in this country. Worse it would do nothing to aid the eradication of child pornography or the incarceration of child pornographers, an objective supported by all members of the Free Speech Coalition. Indeed, the legitimate adult entertainment industry has been, and always will be, an active participant in the global fight against child pornography.”
The House passed HR 4472, subtitled “The Children’s Safety and Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2005”, yesterday.
“We can safely say that today the House clearly made worse already unconstitutional 2257 regulations. Specifically, H.R. 4472:
• Creates section 2257A, which provides record keeping requirements for simulated sexual content;
• Gives the Attorney General of the Unites States the discretion to define certain activities not subject to 2257;
• Adds civil and criminal asset forfeiture penalties in 2257 and obscenity cases;
• Restores section 2256 (E), the “lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person,” to the definition of “sexually explicit conduct” for the purposes of 2257;
• Makes the production of obscenity a federal criminal offense under Section 1465 of title 18 of the United States Code;
• Prohibits defense counsel and expert witnesses in a child pornography case from reproducing evidence that is defined as child pornography under Section 2256.”
This last point represents a particularly dumb piece of legislation. A defendant on trial for child pornography can’t exhibit anything to exonerate himself that has been judged to be child pornography.
It’s like saying that you can’t show a jury that what was judged to be a smoking gun is actually a potato, because guns aren’t allowed in the courtroom.
Previously: Corruption; The (Secondary) Producers; .xxx will have to wait
See also: Free Speech Coalition
Leave a Reply