ACLU Successfully Defends the First Amendment's Future on the Internet

Home : Privacy & Technology : Internet Free Speech
Feature on Reno v. ACLU I - The Battle Over the CDA (6/26/1997)

Reno v. ACLU I

ACLU Successfully Defends the First Amendment's Future on the Internet in Historic, Precedent-Setting Decision

Striking a tremendous victory for the future of the First Amendment on the Internet, the Supreme Court ruled in Reno v. ACLU that the federal Communications Decency Act (CDA) is an unconstitutional restriction on free speech, affirming a lower court decision.

The CDA, Congresses first attempt to regulate the freedom of speech online, was passed in February 1996. In imposing content regulations throughout the Internet, much like broadcast television and radio, the CDA intended to threaten the very existence of the Internet as a means of free expression. In defeating this oppressive law, the ACLU has helped maintain the Internet as a free forum for ideas and commerce.
ACLU Hails Supreme Court Victory in Internet Censorship Challenge Read the Decision in Reno v. ACLU

Statements from Reno v. ACLU plaintiffs and witnesses

* Statement of Jonathan Tasini, President, National Writers Union
* Statement of Candace Perkins Bowen, President, Journalism Education Association
* Statement of Jonathan Wallace, Publisher of The Ethical Spectacle
* Statement of Duff Axsom, Executive Director, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
* Statement of Howard Rheingold, Expert Witness in Reno v. ACLU
* Statement of Donna Hoffman, Expert Witness in Reno v. ACLU



Reno v. ACLU Supreme Court Appeal materials

Legal Documents

* Transcript of the Supreme Court's Oral Argument, March 19th
* ACLU Brief of Appellees: Reno v. ACLU
* ACLU Motion to Affirm the Trial Court Decision filed on behalf of ACLU, et al plaintiffs, October 31, 1996

Press Releases

* ACLU Hails Victory in Internet Censorship Challenge (06/27/1997)
* Chronology of the Case (06/27/1997)
* ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to "Take the First Amendment Pledge" (06/16/1997)
* Supreme Court Hears Arguments Today on the Future of Free Speech in Cyberspace (03/19/1997)
* ACLU Sends Supreme Court Passionate Defense Of Free Speech in Cyberspace (02/20/1997)
* Government's Brief Asserts Unprecedented Powers to Criminalize Online Speech; Oral Argument Set for March 19 (01/22/1997)
* Supreme Court to Review Landmark Decision Barring Internet Censorship (12/06/1996)
* ACLU Asks Court to Affirm Landmark Decision Barring Internet Censorship (10/31/1996)
* ACLU Background Briefing -- Reno v. ACLU: The Road to the Supreme Court (10/31/1996)

ACLU v. Reno Plaintiffs:

* Statements for the Supreme Court Oral Argument Electronic Privacy Information Center, (EPIC)
* National Writers' Union
* BiblioBytes
* Complete list of Reno v. ACLU Plaintiffs and their Affidavits
* Teens Affected by Online Censorship Speak Out

ACLU v. Reno Amici:

* Organizations and individuals submitting briefs Amicus Curiae

ACLU v. Reno Legal Team:

* Christopher A. Hansen, Ann Beeson, Steven R. Shapiro, Marjorie Heins and Catherine Weiss of the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation
* Stefan Presser of the ACLU of Pennsylvania Foundation
* David L. Sobel and Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy Information Center
* Mike Godwin of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
* Roger Evans of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America

ACLU v. Reno Companion Case:

* ALA v. Department of Justice: The Citizens' Internet Empowerment Coalition has complete information on the organizations that joined the challenge to the CDA before the three-judge panel in Philadelphia. This case has been combined for argument with Reno v. ACLU.





* Decision of the Special Three-Judge Panel
* ACLU Analysis of the Trial Decision
* Reno v. ACLU Trial Materials
including transcripts, affidavits, the complaint, and complete background materials, plus Real Audio of the ACLU press conference following the decision

A note on names: Because the government is appealing the decision of the special three-judge panel, the name of the case has been reversed. For a complete explanation of the legal review process -- and the ACLU's motion for summary affirmance -- read "The Road to the Supreme Court" Backgrounder.