Supreme Court won't revive online content law
Legal News Center
The government lost its final attempt Wednesday to revive a federal law intended to protect children from sexual material and other objectionable content on the Internet.
The Supreme Court said it won't consider reviving the Child Online Protection Act, which lower federal courts struck down as unconstitutional. The law has been embroiled in court challenges since it passed in 1998 and never took effect.
It would have barred Web sites from making harmful content available to minors over the Internet.
A federal appeals court in Philadelphia ruled that would violate the First Amendment, because filtering technologies and other parental control tools are a less restrictive way to protect children from inappropriate content online.
The act was passed the year after the Supreme Court ruled that another law intended to protect children from explicit material online — the Communications Decency Act — was unconstitutional.
The Bush administration had pressed the justices to take the case. They offered no comment on their decision to reject the government's appeal.
Five justices who ruled against the Internet blocking law in 2004 remain on the court.
The case is Mukasey v. ACLU. 08-565.
Related listings
-
NYC lawyer accused of $380M scam argues for bail
Legal News Center 01/20/2009A prominent lawyer accused of cheating hedge funds in a $380 million investment ruse argued to be freed on bail Thursday, saying in court documents he's no risk to flee because his U.S. ties are strong and his foreign connections are weak. Marc Dreie...
-
Court ruling endorses Bush surveillance policy
Legal News Center 01/16/2009A special appeals court for the first time has upheld a Bush administration program of warrantless surveillance. In a ruling released Thursday, the court embraced the Protect America Act of 2007, which required telecommunications providers to assist ...
-
MA judge OKs streaming of music-swapping hearing
Legal News Center 01/15/2009A federal judge on Wednesday authorized the first online streaming of oral arguments in a U.S. District Court in Massachusetts in a copyright infringement lawsuit that pits a Boston University graduate student against the music recording industry.U.S...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.