Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997) (Supreme Court of the United States)
Reno v. ACLU is the Supreme Court's first major decision addressing free speech on the Internet.
Do the CDA's provisions criminalizing the knowing transmission or display of "indecent" or "patently offensive" online communications in a manner available to minors violate the First Amendment's protections for free speech?
Content-based restrictions on protected speech are presumptively invalid and must satisfy strict scrutiny: the government must show a compelling interest and narrow tailoring, using the least restrictive means. While the government may bar obscenity and child pornography (which are unprotected), it may not suppress indecent speech that is protected for adults simply because it is inappropriate for minors. Statutes that are vague or substantially overbroad in restricting speech are unconstitutional. Broadcast-specific rationales (such as spectrum scarcity and the medium's intrusive nature) do not justify imposing indecency rules on the Internet.
Yes. The CDA's "indecent" and "patently offensive" provisions (47 U.S.C. § 223(a)(1)(B) and § 223(d)(1)–(2)) violate the First Amendment because they are content-based, vague, and overbroad, and they are not the least restrictive means to protect minors online. The Supreme Court affirmed the preliminary injunction against their enforcement.
Reno is the foundational case establishing that the Internet enjoys full First Amendment protection comparable to print media. It set the modern framework for evaluating government restrictions on online content: content-based criminal prohibitions on indecent speech require strict scrutiny and will fail when less restrictive, user-empowering alternatives exist. The decision also clarifies that protecting minors, while compelling, cannot justify broadly suppressing adult speech. Reno influenced subsequent cases challenging efforts to regulate online pornography and minors' access (e.g., the Child Online Protection Act litigation) and continues to shape debates over the proper roles of government regulation, parental controls, and platform policies in managing online content.