CIPA Litigation

ALA v. United States - June 23, 2003 Supreme Court Decision

Supreme Court Decision: United States et al. v. American Library Association, Inc., et al. (PDF; document's page 194 actually page 246 of 838-page PDF) Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. No. 02-361. Argued March 5, 2003 - Decided June 23, 2003. United States Reports, Bound Volume 539.
FindLaw Analysis of the CIPA Decision: A Recent Supreme Court Decision Allowing the Government to Force Public Libraries to Filter Users' Internet Access Is Less Significant Than It Might At First Appear, by Julie Hilden, Tuesday, July 1, 2003.

May 31, 2002 CIPA Decision: Opinion of the Third Circuit Court, United States District Court for the Eastern District Of Pennsylvania

In the United States District Court for the Eastern District Of Pennsylvania: American Library Association, Inc., et al. v. United States, et al. No. 01-1303. Civil Action. and Multnomah County Public Library, et al. v. United States of America, et al. No. 01-1322. Civil Action. -- Opinion of the Court. May 31, 2002 (PDF). Opinion also available online via Internet Archive.

CIPA case goes to Supreme Court

The three-judge panel sitting in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that "we are constrained to conclude that the library plaintiffs must prevail in their contention that CIPA requires them to violate the First Amendment rights of their patrons, and accordingly is facially invalid"; the three-judge panel ruled Sections 1712(a)(2) and 1721(b) of the Children's Internet Protection Act to be facially invalid under the First Amendment and permanently enjoined the government from enforcing those provisions.

According to a Jenner & Block memorandum dated June 18, 2002, the three-judge panel in the CIPA case held that the FCC and IMLS cannot withhold funds on the ground that a public library has failed to install mandatory filters on every computer. The Court held that "[b]ecause of the inherent limitations in filtering technology, public libraries can never comply with CIPA without blocking access to a substantial amount of speech that is both constitutionally protected and fails to meet even the filtering companies' own blocking criteria." While this decision is directly binding only on the agencies and is not a directive to any particular library, the factual findings and legal conclusions of the Court may serve as useful precedents for other lower courts. ALA thus urges any library using mandatory filtering software to consult with legal counsel to reevaluate their Internet Use Policy and assess the risk of future litigation.

The Justice Department, acting on behalf of the Federal Communications Commission and the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Sciences, formally notified the Supreme Court on June 20 that it would appeal this ruling.

See ALA press release dated December 19, 2002: Supreme Court sets schedule for CIPA appeal: ALA arguments to begin March 5

Briefs

In support of the American Library Association

CIPA before the Supreme Court

ALA Briefs

Brief of Appellees American Library Association, et al. United States of America, et al., Appellants, v. American Library Association, Inc., et al., Appellees. on Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

http://www.ala.org/cipa/meritsbrief.pdf

Brief of Amici Curiae Association of American Publishers in Support of Appellees

http://www.ala.org/cipa/aapbrief.pdf
Brief of Amici Curiae Online Policy Group, Inc. and Seth Finkelstein in Support of Appellees

http://www.onlinepolicy.org/action/legpolicy/cipasupremebrief030210.pdf
Brief Amici Curiae of Partnership for Progress on the Digital Divide, the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network, Harlem Live, Pacific News Service, Peacefire, Rock Out Censorship, Truce, and Wiretap Magazine, in Support of Appellees

http://www.fepproject.org/courtbriefs/cipabrief.pdf

http://www.fepproject.org/courtbriefs/cipabrief.html
Brief of Amicus Curiae the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law in Support of Appellees

http://www.ala.org/cipa/brennanbrief.pdf
Brief for Amici Curiae the Cleveland Public Library, the Rhode Island Library Association. and Thirteen Deans and Directors of University Schools of Library Science in Support of Respondents

http://www.ala.org/cipa/librarybrief.pdf
Brief of Amicus Curiae Jonathan Wallace d/b/a The Ethical Spectacle in support of appellees

http://www.computorney.com/cipabrief.htm
ACLU, ALA and Amici File Supreme Court Briefs Arguing that CIPA is Unconstitutional