The Internet's Constitutional Rights: Exploring Protections And Limits

The internet has become a powerful tool for communication and the exchange of ideas. However, its unique qualities, such as the ability to spread information quickly and widely, have also raised concerns about potential misuse. As a result, there have been calls for tighter restrictions on internet speech, particularly when it comes to protecting minors from accessing inappropriate content. The Supreme Court has been tasked with balancing the need to protect free speech with the potential dangers of the internet. In doing so, it has granted broad constitutional protections for the exchange of ideas online, striking down laws that restrict access to social media for certain groups. The court has also ruled that speech on the internet should receive the same level of First Amendment protection as print media, rather than the reduced protection given to broadcast media.

Explore related products

The Internet and Constitutional Law (Routledge Research in Constitutional Law)

$192 $55.99

On Privacy and Technology

$19.54 $24.95

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99 $9.99

Against Progress: Intellectual Property and Fundamental Values in the Internet Age

$27.87 $30

The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity, and Love in the Digital Age

$17.95 $17.19

Social Media, Fundamental Rights and Courts: A European Perspective (Routledge Research in Human Rights Law)

$42.55 $55.99

The First Amendment and the Internet

The Internet has been described as the most diverse, participatory, and amplified communications medium humans have ever had. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) believes in an uncensored Internet, a vast free-speech zone deserving at least as much First Amendment protection as that afforded to traditional media such as books, newspapers, and magazines.

The ACLU has been at the forefront of protecting online freedom of expression in its myriad forms. In 2022, the ACLU brought the first case in which the U.S. Supreme Court declared speech on the Internet equally worthy of the First Amendment’s historical protections. The Supreme Court struck down a sweeping North Carolina law that flatly banned convicted sex offenders from all access to social media.

In 1997, the Supreme Court in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union struck down a law as being too vague. The court held that the regulation created a chilling effect on speech and prohibited more speech than necessary to achieve the objective of protecting children. The court also rejected the government’s arguments that speech on the internet should receive a reduced level of First Amendment protection, akin to that of the broadcast media which is regulated. Instead, the court ruled that speech on the internet should receive the highest level of First Amendment protection — like that extended to the print media.

The Supreme Court continues to balance First Amendment precedents with the technological features of the medium. One major area of internet regulation is protecting minors from pornography and other indecent or obscene speech.

The Supreme Court's role in protecting the Internet

The Supreme Court has played a significant role in protecting the Internet and ensuring that it receives broad constitutional protection. In a unanimous decision, the Justices struck down a North Carolina law that banned convicted sex offenders from accessing social media, recognising the Internet's role in bringing about a "revolution in thought". The Court has also rejected the notion that speech on the Internet should receive reduced First Amendment protection, instead ruling that it should be afforded the same level of protection as print media. This sets an important precedent for protecting online freedom of expression.

The ACLU has been instrumental in advocating for an uncensored Internet, believing it deserves at least as much First Amendment protection as traditional media. The organisation has worked to defend online freedom of expression, bringing cases before the Supreme Court that have helped shape the legal landscape surrounding Internet protection.

While the Supreme Court has generally supported broad constitutional protection for the Internet, there are ongoing debates about the extent of this protection. Some Justices have expressed concern about the "undisciplined" nature of discussions around First Amendment protections for Internet expression. Additionally, lawmakers have called for tighter restrictions on Internet speech due to concerns about the spread of harmful or indecent content, particularly to minors.

Despite these challenges, the Supreme Court continues to play a crucial role in balancing First Amendment precedents with the evolving technological features of the Internet, ensuring that it remains a space for the free exchange and exploration of ideas.

The ACLU's work to defend online freedom of expression

The ACLU works in courts, legislatures, and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and the laws of the United States guarantee everyone in the country. The ACLU believes in an uncensored Internet, a vast free-speech zone deserving at least as much First Amendment protection as that afforded to traditional media such as books, newspapers, and magazines. The ACLU has been at the forefront of protecting online freedom of expression in its myriad forms.

The ACLU brought the first case in which the U.S. Supreme Court declared speech on the Internet equally worthy of the First Amendment’s historical protections. In 1997, the Supreme Court in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union struck down a law as being too vague. The court held that the regulation created a chilling effect on speech and prohibited more speech than necessary to achieve the objective of protecting children. The court also rejected the government’s arguments that speech on the internet should receive a reduced level of First Amendment protection, akin to that of the broadcast media which is regulated. Instead, the court ruled that speech on the internet should receive the highest level of First Amendment protection — like that extended to the print media.

The Supreme Court continues to balance First Amendment precedents with the technological features of the medium. One major area of internet regulation is protecting minors from pornography and other indecent or obscene speech. The internet’s unique qualities — such as its ability to spread potentially dangerous information quickly and widely, harass others, and provide an easy way for minors to access pornographic content — have prompted lawmakers to call for tighter restrictions on internet speech.

In a unanimous decision, the Justices struck down a sweeping North Carolina law that flatly banned convicted sex offenders from all access to social media. Even three Justices who did not support the main opinion agreed that the state law at issue “has a staggering reach” and they agreed it was invalid. But they voiced worry that the lead opinion, written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, had been “undisciplined” in its discussion of how far the First Amendment goes to protect expression via the Internet.

Explore related products

Terrorism and State Surveillance of Communications

$23.99 $29.99

The Desk Reference Companion to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA)

$104.45 $109.95

Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment

$12.63 $17.99

Free Internet Access as a Human Right

$34.19 $35.99

Data Independence: Reclaiming Privacy in an Era of Evolving Tech

$2.99 $29.99

Free Speech and Turbulent Freedom: The Dangerous Allure of Censorship in the Digital Era

$17.05 $30.99

The Internet as a 'free-speech zone'

The Internet is a free-speech zone, and the ACLU believes it should be an uncensored space, deserving of at least as much First Amendment protection as that afforded to traditional media such as books, newspapers, and magazines. The ACLU has been at the forefront of protecting online freedom of expression, bringing the first case in which the U.S. Supreme Court declared speech on the Internet equally worthy of the First Amendment’s historical protections.

In 1997, the Supreme Court in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union struck down a law as being too vague. The court held that the regulation created a chilling effect on speech and prohibited more speech than necessary to achieve the objective of protecting children. The court also rejected the government’s arguments that speech on the internet should receive a reduced level of First Amendment protection, akin to that of the broadcast media which is regulated. Instead, the court ruled that speech on the internet should receive the highest level of First Amendment protection, like that extended to the print media.

The Supreme Court continues to balance First Amendment precedents with the technological features of the medium. One major area of internet regulation is protecting minors from pornography and other indecent or obscene speech. The internet’s unique qualities — such as its ability to spread potentially dangerous information quickly and widely, harass others, and provide an easy way for minors to access pornographic content — have prompted lawmakers to call for tighter restrictions on internet speech.

However, others argue that Congress and the courts should refrain from limiting the possibilities of the internet unnecessarily and prematurely because it is a technologically evolving medium. The court must exercise extreme caution before suggesting that the First Amendment provides scant protection for access to vast networks in that medium.

Protecting minors from accessing pornography online

The Supreme Court has ruled that the internet should receive the highest level of First Amendment protection, akin to that of print media. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has been at the forefront of protecting online freedom of expression, and the ACLU believes in an uncensored internet, deserving of at least as much First Amendment protection as that afforded to traditional media such as books, newspapers, and magazines.

However, the internet's unique qualities, such as its ability to spread potentially dangerous information quickly and widely, harass others, and provide an easy way for minors to access pornographic content, have prompted lawmakers to call for tighter restrictions on internet speech. One major area of internet regulation is protecting minors from accessing pornography and other indecent or obscene speech.

The Supreme Court has struck down a North Carolina law that banned convicted sex offenders from accessing social media, finding that the modern internet, especially social media sites, are bringing about a "revolution in thought". The court must exercise extreme caution before suggesting that the First Amendment provides scant protection for access to the internet.

To protect minors from accessing pornography online, lawmakers could consider implementing age verification systems or requiring internet service providers to block access to pornographic websites for users under a certain age. Additionally, parents and guardians can install parental control software on their devices to restrict access to inappropriate content. It is important to note that any restrictions on internet speech must be carefully considered to avoid infringing on First Amendment rights.

Frequently asked questions