| Chapter 2: | Framing the question: A review of the relevant literature |
|
|
access to materials directly related to state-mandated curriculum topics in school without adequately shielding the students from objectionable content” (p. 74). Significantly for my research, the authors note that their study “serves as groundwork for a potential in-depth future study within the schools that will investigate how students use the Internet within the educational environment and how blocking software affects this use” (p. 75).
First Amendment Issues
Any complete discussion of the literature on filtering technology must include an accounting of legal challenges to government-ordered restrictions on Internet speech. Kaiser (2000) provides an early analysis of the constitutional issues involved in the use of Internet filters as applied to public schools. While minors have lesser First Amendment rights than adults, nevertheless, their rights remain substantial. Congress’ first attempt to protect minors from indecent online speech was the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which was ultimately struck down by the Supreme Court as a violation of the First Amendment. Congress next tried to tailor more narrowly the language of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) to withstand a constitutional challenge. However, COPA has never been implemented. The Supreme Court has twice upheld injunctions by the Circuit Court without ruling directly on its constitutionality ( Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union , 2004). It is now back in Circuit Court, where the government must show under the strict scrutiny test that the law employs the least restrictive means of achieving a compelling government interest.
Nancy Willard (2002) provides an accounting of the failures of the Children’s Internet Protection Act, as Congress’ third attempt to protect children from obscenity, child pornography, and material harmful to minors. Again, the legislation was struck down in District Court, with a ruling that the federal requirement for filtering software violates the constitutional rights of library patrons, both children and adults. As noted above, the legal challenge by the American Library Association and