Nitke v. Gonzales
American legal case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Nitke v. Gonzales?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Nitke v. Gonzalez, 413 F.Supp.2d 262 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) was a United States District Court for the Southern District of New York case regarding obscene materials published online. The plaintiff challenged the constitutionality of the obscenity provision of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). She claimed that it was overbroad when applied in the context of the Internet because certain contents deemed lawful in some communities and unlawful in others will be restricted due to the open access of the Internet. The plaintiff also sought a permanent injunction against the enforcement of the obscenity provision of the CDA. The court concluded that insufficient evidence was presented to show there was substantial variation in community standards, as applied in the "Miller test", and to show how much protected speech would actually be impaired because of these differences. The relief sought was denied, and the court ruled for the defendant. The Supreme Court subsequently affirmed this ruling without comment.
Nitke v. Gonzales | |
---|---|
Court | United States District Court for the Southern District of New York |
Full case name | NITKE v. GONZALEZ, 413 F.Supp.2d 262 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) |
Decided | Jul. 25, 2005 |
Citations | 253 F.Supp.2d 587 (S.D.N.Y. 2003), 413 F.Supp.2d 262 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) |
Case history | |
Subsequent actions | The US Supreme Court denied an appeal against the decision in Nitke v. Gonzalez on March 20th, 2006 (affirming district court decision). |
Holding | |
The plaintiff failed to show substantial variation in community standards as applied in the "Miller test" that could lead to the unnecessary impairing of First Amendment protected speech. The overbreadth of the CDA was therefore not found and the injunctive relief was denied. | |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Robert D. Sack, Richard M. Berman, Gerard E. Lynch |
Keywords | |
Communications Decency Act of 1996, Miller test, Obscenity |