Write a summary of the facts of the case (in your own words). What was the court's ruling?
The facts of the case Reno v. ACLU (1997) was that the internet affects the minors
through the materials they access. Some of the materials such as phonography would affect those
below 18 years by eroding their morals because of the indecent materials they watch on the
online platforms. Additionally, there is the fact that the case does not affect the majority such as
the aged. Some restrictions put in place such as the implementation of passwords to prevent the
minors from accessing some areas that influence their behaviors. Fines imposed against any
person who shares some indecent materials that may affect the children.
Do you agree with the ruling? Why or why not?
I agree with the ruling as stated by the court because this would restrict free speech
among the internet users. The act failed to report what is indecent communication and therefore
would be limited to a particular group. The group that would be affected by the law would be the
adult because most of them use the internet for research and critical purposes such as business
and communication.
I agree with the ruling because if the restrictions are put communication would be
hampered. Additionally, it is easier to prevent the harm caused to the minor than restricting the
platform from usage by potential users. The platform should thus continue in operations but with
restrictions to prevent the children from harm.
What did you learn about Supreme Court cases from this exercise?
From the case Reno v. ACLU (1997), I learned that Supreme Court orders judgment after
making clear investigations. The Supreme Court follows the directives of the other courts but not
fully. The Supreme Court hears some suggestions from the district court and makes its final
