Supreme Court Hears Web-Blocking Case

Supreme Court Rules on Web Blocking Case

ACLU Disappointed, but Sees Limited Impact on Adults 

General Materials

Legal materials

• Supreme Court ruling                 
• Supreme Court Brief
• Response to Government's Jurisdictional Statement                        
• Government's appeal to Supreme Court                        
• Trial court decision (May 31, 2002)             
• Plaintiffs                       
• Trial Schedule and Witness Biographies                                   
• Courtroom Report                                   
• Plaintiffs' Joint Post-Trial Documents                                  
• ACLU Pretrial Brief                                  
• Redacted final joint party stipulations                                  
• ACLU Complaint in Multnomah County Public Library et al., vs. United States of America, et al.                                  
• ACLU Response to Government's Motion to Dismiss                                    
• Expert Report: Study of Web Blocking Programs by Ben Edelman of Harvard University's Berkman Center                                  
• Expert Report: Prof. Joseph Janes of the University of Washington              
• Expert Report: Library Consultant Anne G. Lipow 

Examples of Wrongly Blocked Web Sites

• Evidence submitted at trial                                   
• Consumer Reports Reviews Blocking Software Programs  
• Find Out Who's Been Censored at the Censorware Project 

ACLU Special Reports

• Censorship In a Box: Why Blocking Software is Wrong for Public Libraries  
• Fahrenheit 451.2: Is Cyberspace Burning?

Press Releases

• ACLU Disappointed in Ruling on Internet Censorship in Libraries, But Sees Limited Impact for Adults (6/23/2003)                  
• ACLU Urges Supreme Court to Reject Law Mandating Internet Censorship in Libraries (3/05/2003)  
• ACLU Optimistic That Supreme Court Will Reject Law Mandating Internet Censorship in Libraries (11/12/2002)
• Federal Court Rejects Government Censorship in Libraries, Citing Free Speech Rights of Patrons (05/31/2002)   
• Librarians Take the Stand in First Day of Trial on Government Censorship in Libraries  (03/25/2002)
• House Committee Report on Pornography and File-Sharing Confirms ACLU Concerns With Blocking Software (07/27/2001)
• ACLU Responds to Confusion Over Library Blocking Software Law; Seeks December Trial Date in Legal Challenge (05/17/2001)   
• Library Internet Access is Still Free from Censorship as Law Goes into Effect, ACLU Tells Libraries, Patrons (04/19/2001)   
• ACLU Tells Committee That New Internet Law Blocks Protected Speech and Should Itself Be Blocked (04/04/2001)    
• ACLU Files Challenge to Library Internet Censorship In Case Fast-Tracked for Supreme Court Review (03/20/2001)
• In First-Ever Challenge, CA Court of Appeals Upholds Library's Right to Provide Uncensored Internet Access (03/07/2001)
• As ACLU Prepares Legal Challenge to Mandatory Internet Blocking, Consumer Reports Says Products Fail Test (02/14/2001)
•  ACLU Will Fight Government Plan to Censor Internet in Libraries (01/19/2001)
• Citing New Government Report, ACLU Calls on Congress to Reject Internet Blocking Bill (10/20/2000)
• ACLU Says Filtering Legislation Represents Little More Than Sugar Pill for Parents (05/20/1999)
• New ACLU Report Condemns Mandatory Blocking Software in Public Libraries (06/17/1999)
• Judge Sets Highest Legal Hurdle For Using Blocking Software in Libraries (04/07/1998)
• ACLU Vows Fight As New Internet Censorship Bills Slither Through Senate (03/12/1998)
• ACLU Hails Victory as California Library Agrees to Remove Internet Filters from Public Computers (01/28/1998)
• Internet Funding Proposal Would Put Big Brother in Classroom (01/28/1999)

Other Resources

• American Library Association page on CIPA challenge                                   
• COPA Commission report (panel created by Congress that recommended against blocking programs)                                    
• Government Report on the Digital Divide

Plaintiffs' Legal Team

• Ann Beeson and Christopher A. Hansen of the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation 
• Stefan Presser of the ACLU of Pennsylvania Foundation 
• David L. Sobel of the Electronic Privacy Information Center 
• Lee Tien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation 
• Chuck Sims with the New York City law firm Proskauer Rose 

• Scott Asphaug, Multnomah County Attorney.