The three-judge panel of the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a 2007 decision (ACLU v. Mukasey), by U.S. District Judge Lowell A. Reed Jr., striking down the 1998 as an invalid government restriction of First Amendment rights.
Perhaps We Do Minors Harm
In his majority decision to strike COPA, Judge Reed wrote, "Perhaps we do the minors of this country harm if First Amendment protections, which they will with age inherit, are chipped away in the name of their protection."
COPA was intended to regulate the collection of personal information from children under age 13 by Web sites. COPA also attempted to make Web sites legally responsible for protecting the privacy and safety of children while online.
Legislating Decency a Constitutional Mine Field
Congress’ first version of COPA, the Communications Decency Act of 1996, similarly failed a constitutional test in 1997 when the U.S. Supreme Court first ruled (Reno v. ACLU) that freedom of speech and press extended to the Internet.
In its June 10, 2008 decision, the Philadelphia court of appeals determined that, despite the importance of protecting children, Congress' second attempt to regulate Web content – COPA -- was just as unconstitutional as its first.
In the Philadelphia decision, Senior Judge Morton Greenberg wrote that while the First Amendment's "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;" clause does allow Congress some carefully crafted latitude when a need arises to meet a "compelling government interest," COPA was "not narrowly tailored to serve the Government’s compelling interest in preventing minors from being exposed to harmful material on the Web."
In addition, Judge Greenberg found that the existence other more effective and less restrictive methods of protecting children online, such as content filtering and blocking software, further brought COPA into conflict with the Constitution.
The decision of the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals marks the seventh time since 1998 that U.S. federal courts have issued opinions finding serious constitutional problems with COPA.
As of Aug. 1, 2008, the government had not decided whether or not it would appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.
