210
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Legal and Policy Issues

Pursuing the Panderer: An Analysis of United States v. Williams

&
Pages 190-203 | Received 19 Jan 2009, Accepted 30 Dec 2009, Published online: 17 Mar 2010
 

Abstract

In May 2008, the Supreme Court addressed whether the government can regulate the ownership and distribution of virtual child pornography. U.S. v. Williams marked the first time the Court directly addressed the concept of pandering virtual child pornography. This article examines the Court's decision in U.S. v. Williams and the relative importance of its holding. In U.S. v. Williams, the Supreme Court upheld an act of Congress targeting the business people behind the child pornography market. Restricting the sale of both real and virtual child pornography is essential to combat the various problems surrounding its existence, which include policing its creation and distribution on the Internet as well as the connection between child pornography and subsequent sexual offenses against children.

Notes

1. It is noteworthy that Justice Scalia dissented in Free Speech Coalition but authored the majority opinion in Williams.

2. This directly rejects the Eleventh Circuit's contention that only commercial speech, not private speech, involving illegal transactions could be prohibited under the First Amendment.

3. The dissenting justices noted that the government could not identify a single case in which a defendant was acquitted based on a “computer generated images” defense.

Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002).

Child Pornography Prevention Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2256 (1996).

Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184 (1964).

New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982).

Osborne v. Ohio, 495 U.S. 103 (1990).

Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to End the Exploitation of Children Today Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2252A (2003).

United States v. Williams, 2004 WL 5388528 (2004).

United States v. Williams, 444 F.3d 1286 (2006).

United States v. Williams, 128 S.Ct. 1830 (2008).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Patrick N. McGrain

Patrick N. McGrain, PhD, is an assistant professor of criminal justice at DeSales University. He received his PhD in criminal justice from Temple University. Patrick's present research interests include sexual deviance and the assessment of sex offender treatment programs.

Jennifer L. Moore

Jennifer L. Moore, Esq., is an assistant professor of criminal justice at DeSales University. She received her JD with honors from Emory University School of Law in Atlanta, Georgia. Her teaching interests include criminal law, the American legal system, and legal writing and research.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 219.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.