It is hoped by most internet users that the Supreme Court will agree with 2 federal courts that found the Communications Decency Act unconstitutional, ruling that the Internet is a unique communications technology that deserves the same First Amendment protections enjoyed by the print media.

In anticipation of this historic event, says the CIEC, the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and the Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) have launched a COUNTDOWN TO THE SUPREME COURT campaign to help spread the news about the case and provide an opportunity for Internet users to join the fight.

How did the Communications Decency Act (CDA) come about? It was enacted in February, 1996 as part of the Telecommunications Reform Act. The law seeks to protect minors from objectionable or sexually explicit material on the Internet by imposing broad content regulations and stiff criminal penalties on the "display" of "indecent" or "patently offensive" material on the Internet.

While supporters of the CDA argue that the law is designed to protect children from so-called "pornography" on the Internet, two separate Federal Courts have agreed that the law goes far beyond that and would ban otherwise constitutionally protected materials.

It is important, says CIEC activists, "to note that the Communications Decency Act is not about obscenity, child pornography, or using the Internet to stalk or prey on children. These activities are already illegal under current law and are not at issue in this case."

The Citizen's Internet Empowerment Coalition argues that while well-intentioned, the Communications Decency Act fails to account for the unique nature of the Internet, and that it will have a far-reaching chilling effect on constitutionally protected speech on-line. On a global, decentralized communications medium like the Internet, the only effective and constitutional means of controlling access to objectionable material is to rely on users and parents, not the government, to decide what is or is not appropriate.