Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Reno V American Civil Liberties Union. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
6 pages in length. The ruling in Reno v American Civil Liberties Union served to set a precedent pertaining to Internet censorship, free speech and sexually-related material whereby the ever-growing impact of children's cyberspace accessibility was not deemed a justifiable reason for stripping adults of their constitutional rights. The razor thin line between where government intervention is appropriate and where it is unacceptable was brought into greater focus with this particular case, inasmuch as Internet presence has invaded virtually every aspect of contemporary life. To question the legal permissibility of adult content merely because minors are able to access this same material is to run rough-shod over the fundamental First Amendment rights of every adult. Instead, the ruling inferred, alternate means must be used to dissuade minors from participating in what many deem to be inappropriate behavior, not the least of which begins with parental guidance - not government intervention. Bibliography lists 7 sources.
Page Count:
6 pages (~225 words per page)
File: LM1_TLCRenoVACLU.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
deemed a justifiable reason for stripping adults of their constitutional rights. The razor thin line between where government intervention is appropriate and where it is unacceptable was brought into
greater focus with this particular case, inasmuch as Internet presence has invaded virtually every aspect of contemporary life. To question the legal permissibility of adult content merely because minors
are able to access this same material is to run rough-shod over the fundamental First Amendment rights of every adult. Instead, the ruling inferred, alternate means must be used
to dissuade minors from participating in what many deem to be inappropriate behavior, not the least of which begins with parental guidance - not government intervention (American Lawyer Media, 2002).
Justice Stevens delivered the majority opinion and effectively summed up the crux of the decision by noting how it was presumed that "governmental regulation of the content of speech is
more likely to interfere with the free exchange of ideas than to encourage it," further pointing out how "the interest in encouraging freedom of expression in a democratic society outweighs
any theoretical but unproven benefit of censorship" (Stevens, 1997). Constitutional freedoms have long been worthy of both verbal and physical battle; indeed, to
interfere with ones inherent constitutional rights is to intrude upon the very essence of American democracy. Nowhere is this more evident than in Reno v American Civil Liberties Union
given that the Internet has become both a successful commodity and an integral component of contemporary culture; clearly, its presence is serving to restructure the very basis upon which society
operates within this bubble of virtuality. The capacity for Reno v American Civil Liberties Union to lay the groundwork for future Internet censorship
...