[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 298 Introduced in House (IH)]






108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 298

Expressing the sense of Congress supporting vigorous enforcement of the 
                        Federal obscenity laws.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 8, 2003

  Mr. Sullivan (for himself, Mr. Akin, Mr. Bartlett of Maryland, Mr. 
Boozman, Mr. Brady of Texas, Mr. Cannon, Mr. Chabot, Mrs. Jo Ann Davis 
  of Virginia, Mr. Doolittle, Mr. English, Mr. Forbes, Mr. Franks of 
Arizona, Mr. Goode, Mr. Goodlatte, Ms. Hart, Mr. Hayes, Mr. Hostettler, 
 Mr. Hunter, Mr. Jones of North Carolina, Mr. Miller of Florida, Mrs. 
 Myrick, Mr. Osborne, Mr. Pence, Mr. Pickering, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Ryun of 
Kansas, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Shimkus, Mr. Souder, Mr. Terry, Mr. Stearns, 
 Mr. Tiahrt, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Weldon of Florida, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Wilson 
  of South Carolina, and Mr. Wolf) submitted the following concurrent 
 resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and 
in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION


 
Expressing the sense of Congress supporting vigorous enforcement of the 
                        Federal obscenity laws.

Whereas the Supreme Court in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) held that 
        obscene material is ``unprotected by the first amendment'' (413 U.S. at 
        23) and that obscenity laws can be enforced against ``hardcore 
        pornography'' (413 U.S. at 28);
Whereas the Miller Court stated that ``to equate the free and robust exchange of 
        ideas and political debate with commercial exploitation of obscene 
        material demeans the grand conception of the first amendment and its 
        high purposes in the historic struggle for freedom.'' (413 U.S. at 34);
Whereas the Supreme Court in Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973) 
        recognized that there are legitimate governmental interests at stake in 
        stemming the tide of obscene materials, which include--

    (1) protecting ``the quality of life and total community environment'' 
(413 U.S. at 58);

    (2) protecting ``public safety'' (413 U.S. at 58);

    (3) maintaining ``a decent society'' (413 U.S. at 59-60);

    (4) protecting ``the social interest in order and morality'' (413 U.S. 
at 61); and

    (5) protecting ``family life'' (413 U.S. at 63);

Whereas Congress, in an effort to protect these same legitimate governmental 
        interests, enacted legislation in 1988 to strengthen Federal obscenity 
        laws and in 1996 to clarify that use of an interactive computer service 
        to transport obscene materials in or affecting interstate or foreign 
        commerce is prohibited;
Whereas the 1986 Final Report of the Attorney General's Commission on 
        Pornography found that ``increasingly, the most prevalent forms of 
        pornography'' fit the description of ``sexually violent material'' (p. 
        323) and that ``an enormous amount of the most sexually explicit 
        material available'' can be categorized as ``degrading'' to people, 
        ``most often women'' (p. 331);
Whereas the Internet has become a conduit for hardcore pornography that now 
        reaches directly into tens of millions of American homes, where even 
        small children can be exposed to Internet obscenity and older children 
        can easily find it;
Whereas a national opinion poll conducted in March 2002 by Wirthlin Worldwide 
        marketing research company found that 81 percent of adult Americans say 
        that ``Federal laws against Internet obscenity should be vigorously 
        enforced'';
Whereas a May 2, 2002, report from the National Academies' National Research 
        Council stated that ``aggressive enforcement of existing antiobscenity 
        laws can help reduce children's access to certain kinds of sexually 
        explicit material on the Internet'';
Whereas on April 16, 2002, the United States Supreme Court in Ashcroft v. Free 
        Speech Coalition invalidated a Federal law aimed at ``virtual child 
        pornography'';
Whereas vigorous enforcement of obscenity laws can help reduce the amount of 
        ``virtual child pornography'' now readily available to sexual predators; 
        and
Whereas it continues to be the desire of the People of the United States of 
        America and their representatives in Congress to recognize and protect 
        the governmental interests recognized as legitimate by the United States 
        Supreme Court in Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973): 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that the Federal obscenity laws should 
be vigorously enforced throughout the United States.
                                 <all>