Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/16pdf/15-1194_08l1.pdf
Page Number: 9

6 

PACKINGHAM v. NORTH CAROLINA 

Opinion of the Court 

is closed’ ”).  So too here.  While we now may be coming to
the realization that the Cyber Age is a revolution of historic
proportions,  we  cannot  appreciate  yet  its  full  dimensions
and  vast  potential  to  alter  how  we  think,  express  our-
selves,  and  define  who  we  want  to  be.    The  forces  and 
directions  of  the  Internet  are  so  new,  so  protean,  and  so
far reaching that courts must be conscious that what they
say today might be obsolete tomorrow. 

This  case  is  one  of  the  first  this  Court  has  taken  to 
address  the  relationship  between  the  First  Amendment
and  the  modern  Internet.  As  a  result,  the  Court  must 
exercise  extreme  caution  before  suggesting  that  the  First
Amendment  provides  scant  protection  for  access  to  vast 
networks in that medium. 

III 
This  background  informs  the  analysis  of  the  North
Carolina  statute  at  issue.    Even  making  the  assumption
that  the  statute  is  content  neutral  and  thus  subject  to
intermediate  scrutiny,  the  provision  cannot  stand.    In 
order  to  survive  intermediate  scrutiny,  a  law  must  be
“narrowly  tailored  to  serve  a  significant  governmental 
interest.”  McCullen  v.  Coakley,  573  U. S.  ___,  ___  (2014) 
(slip  op.,  at  18)  (internal  quotation  marks  omitted).    In 
other words, the law must not “burden substantially more 
speech  than  is  necessary  to  further  the  government’s
legitimate interests.”  Id., at ___ (slip op., at 19) (internal
quotation marks omitted). 

For  centuries  now,  inventions  heralded  as  advances  in 
human progress have been exploited by the criminal mind. 
New  technologies,  all  too  soon,  can  become  instruments
used to commit serious crimes.  The railroad is one exam-
ple,  see  M.  Crichton,  The  Great  Train  Robbery,  p.  xv 
(1975),  and  the  telephone  another,  see  18  U. S. C.  §1343. 
So it will be with the Internet and social media. 

There  is  also  no  doubt  that,  as  this  Court  has  recog-