91´«Ã½

91´«Ã½ v. United States - June 23, 2003 Supreme Court Decision

• (PDF; document's page 194 actually page 246 of 838-page PDF) Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. No. 02-361. Argued March 5, 2003 - Decided June 23, 2003. .

• FindLaw Analysis of the CIPA Decision: .

May 31, 2002 CIPA Decision: Opinion of the Third Circuit Court, United States District Court for the Eastern District Of Pennsylvania

• In the United States District Court for the Eastern District Of Pennsylvania: 91´«Ã½, Inc., et al. v. United States, et al. No. 01-1303. Civil Action. and Multnomah County Public Library, et al. v. United States of America, et al. No. 01-1322. Civil Action. -- Opinion of the Court. May 31, 2002 (PDF). .

CIPA case goes to Supreme Court

The three-judge panel sitting in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that "we are constrained to conclude that the library plaintiffs must prevail in their contention that CIPA requires them to violate the First Amendment rights of their patrons, and accordingly is facially invalid"; the three-judge panel ruled Sections 1712(a)(2) and 1721(b) of the Children's Internet Protection Act to be facially invalid under the First Amendment and permanently enjoined the government from enforcing those provisions.

According to a Jenner & Block memorandum dated June 18, 2002, the three-judge panel in the CIPA case held that the FCC and IMLS cannot withhold funds on the ground that a public library has failed to install mandatory filters on every computer. The Court held that "[b]ecause of the inherent limitations in filtering technology, public libraries can never comply with CIPA without blocking access to a substantial amount of speech that is both constitutionally protected and fails to meet even the filtering companies' own blocking criteria." While this decision is directly binding only on the agencies and is not a directive to any particular library, the factual findings and legal conclusions of the Court may serve as useful precedents for other lower courts. 91´«Ã½ thus urges any library using mandatory filtering software to consult with legal counsel to reevaluate their Internet Use Policy and assess the risk of future litigation.

The Justice Department, acting on behalf of the Federal Communications Commission and the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Sciences, formally notified the Supreme Court on June 20 that it would appeal this ruling.

• See 91´«Ã½ press release dated December 19, 2002:

Briefs

In support of the 91´«Ã½

• Brief of Appellees 91´«Ã½, et al. United States of America, et al., Appellants, v. 91´«Ã½, Inc., et al., Appellees. on Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (PDF)
• Brief of Amici Curiae Association of American Publishers in Support of Appellees (PDF)
• (PDF)
• Brief of Amicus Curiae the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law in Support of Appellees
• Brief for Amici Curiae the Cleveland Public Library, the Rhode Island Library Association. and Thirteen Deans and Directors of University Schools of Library Science in Support of Respondents (PDF)
• Plaintiffs Joint Post-Trial Reply Brief (PDF)
• Plaintiffs Joint Post-Trial Reply Brief Table of Contents (PDF)
• Plaintiffs Joint Post-Trial Reply Brief Table of Authorities (PDF)
• Plaintiffs Joint Post-trial Brief (PDF)
• Plaintiffs Joint Post-trial Brief Table of Contents (PDF)
• Plaintiffs Joint Post-trial Brief Table of Authorities (PDF)
• The signed scheduling order from the Court
• 91´«Ã½'s response to the government's Motion to Dismiss (PDF)
• Plaintiffs in the Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief filed by 91´«Ã½ in Philadelphia on March 20, 2001
• Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (PDF of 91´«Ã½'s complaint filed in Philadelphia on March 20, 2001)

91´«Ã½ Briefs

| Top | 91´«Ã½ Briefs | ACLU Briefs | Government Briefs | Bottom |

Brief of Appellees 91´«Ã½, et al. United States of America, et al., Appellants, v. 91´«Ã½, Inc., et al., Appellees. on Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

http://www.ala.org/cipa/meritsbrief.pdf

• Brief of Amici Curiae Association of American Publishers in Support of Appellees
  
  http://www.ala.org/cipa/aapbrief.pdf
• Brief of Amici Curiae Online Policy Group, Inc. and Seth Finkelstein in Support of Appellees
  
  
• Brief Amici Curiae of Partnership for Progress on the Digital Divide, the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network, Harlem Live, Pacific News Service, Peacefire, Rock Out Censorship, Truce, and Wiretap Magazine, in Support of Appellees
  
  
  
  
• Brief of Amicus Curiae the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law in Support of Appellees
  
  http://www.ala.org/cipa/brennanbrief.pdf
• Brief for Amici Curiae the Cleveland Public Library, the Rhode Island Library Association. and Thirteen Deans and Directors of University Schools of Library Science in Support of Respondents
  
  http://www.ala.org/cipa/librarybrief.pdf
• Brief of Amicus Curiae Jonathan Wallace d/b/a The Ethical Spectacle in support of appellees
  
  

ACLU Briefs

| Top | 91´«Ã½ Briefs | ACLU Briefs| Government Briefs | Bottom |

Government Briefs and Amicus Briefs

| Top | 91´«Ã½ Briefs | ACLU Briefs | Government Briefs | Bottom |

At the 's site:

(Brief)

(Joint Appendix, Vols. 1-3)

• has posted links to many of the on the Web.