A House subcommittee today approved legislation
that would
criminalize the distribution of images that have been digitally
"morphed" to look like child pornography.
By voice vote, the Judiciary Committee's Crime Subcommittee passed
the "Child Obscenity and Pornography Prevention Act of 2002."
Proposed by Crime Subcommittee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and
backed by Attorney General John Ashcroft, the legislation was
introduced in response to a Supreme Court ruling that voided a 1996
prohibition on morphed child porn.
In a hearing earlier today, Associate Deputy Attorney General Daniel
Collins defended the proposed law against criticisms that it could
run afoul of the same constitutional restrictions that scuttled the
1996 measure.
The types of images prohibited under the legislation "are precisely
the sort that appeal to the worst form of prurient interest, that are
patently offensive in the light of any applicable community standards
and that lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific
value in virtually any context," Collins said.
On April 16, the Supreme Court struck down the Child Pornography
Prevention Act, which outlawed the possession or distribution of
pornography containing computer-generated images showing children
apparently engaged in sex acts.
Supporters and cosponsors of Smith's bill say it is more narrowly
crafted than the now-defunct 1996 mandate and as such should pass
constitutional muster.
At the hearing preceding today's vote, Rep. Robert Scott, D-Va.,
questioned Collins closely, asking whether the Smith bill had any
chance of surviving Supreme Court scrutiny.
"The Supreme Court went to great lengths to say unless it's a real
minor, it's not illegal," Scott said. Scott also cited what he said
was the High Court's contention that the First Amendment is "turned
upside-down" if defendants are forced to prove that they did not
employ real minors in creating a digitally manipulated work.
Under Smith's proposal, digitally generated pictures of prepubescent
children would be banned outright.
While images depicting older children would also be banned, the bill
creates a new legal safe harbor for pornographers who can prove that
they did not use real children to create their images.
"It seems to me (the Supreme Court) is saying 'if you can't
distinguish (between real and digitally created images) that's not
the defendant's problem, that's your problem,'" Scott told Collins.
But Collins said the Supreme Court ruling expressly left open the
possibility of creating the type of "affirmative defense" called for
under Smith's proposal.
"We can craft a narrowly drawn prohibition," Collins said. "We can
criminalize (morphed content) subject to the appropriate affirmative
defense."
The subcommittee today voted on a substitute version of the original
bill, which Smith said contained several technical and wording
changes meant to tighten the legislation and erase some ambiguity in
the original bill text.
Reported by Washtech.com, http://www.washtech.com .
16:17 CST
(20020509/WIRES TOP, ONLINE, LEGAL/KIDPORN/PHOTO)