Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 902.0

529US3

Unit: $U60

[09-26-01 12:39:04] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 803 (2000)

827

Appendix to opinion of the Court

Government can address.
It must do so, however, in a way
consistent with First Amendment principles. Here the Gov-
ernment has not met the burden the First Amendment
imposes.

The Government has failed to show that § 505 is the least
restrictive means for addressing a real problem; and the Dis-
trict Court did not err in holding the statute violative of the
First Amendment.
In light of our ruling, it is unnecessary
to address the second question presented: whether the Dis-
trict Court was divested of jurisdiction to consider the Gov-
ernment’s postjudgment motions after the Government ﬁled
a notice of appeal in this Court. The judgment of the Dis-
trict Court is afﬁrmed.

It is so ordered.

APPENDIX TO OPINION OF THE COURT

Section 505 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L.
104–104, 110 Stat. 136, 47 U. S. C. § 561 (1994 ed., Supp. III),
provides in relevant part:

“(a) Requirement

“In providing sexually explicit adult programming or
other programming that is indecent on any channel of
its service primarily dedicated to sexually-oriented pro-
gramming, a multichannel video programming distribu-
tor shall fully scramble or otherwise fully block the
video and audio portion of such channel so that one not
a subscriber to such channel or programming does not
receive it.
“(b) Implementation

“Until a multichannel video programming distributor
complies with the requirement set forth in subsection
(a) of this section, the distributor shall limit the access
of children to the programming referred to in that sub-
section by not providing such programming during the
hours of the day (as determined by the Commission)