Penalties range as high as 15 years in prison. An affirmative defense allows manufacturers to show that the images were made with real, over-18, models and were not marketed in a way that suggests the images are of minors. But lawyers who have tried to get the law overturned say it is unconstitutionally vague and bans expression protected by the First Amendment. Mr. Sirkin, representing the Los Angeles-based Free Speech Coalition, filed a challenge to the CPPA in San Francisco, in hoping to draw a sympathetic judge, he says. The case was appealed and was argued before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in March.
Lawyers involved in the case expect a ruling any time.
Free Speech Coalition v. Reno , 97-16536. In Maine, meanwhile, a sole practitioner trying to get his client out from under charges of possessing child pornography convinced a district court judge there to declare the CPPA unconstitutionally vague. The government appealed to the 1st Circuit. Major media associations have been reluctant to lead the fight. And the lawyer who won the Maine case, Peter E. Rodway, of Portland's Rodway and Horodyski, is a criminal lawyer whose horizons are limited to defending his client.