Customer center

We are a boutique essay service, not a mass production custom writing factory. Let us create a perfect paper for you today!

Example research essay topic: United States Government First Amendment - 1,458 words

NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote

... l harmful to minors (ACLU v. Reno II). The Child Online Protection Act is considered, a broad censorship law that severely restricts any speech on the Web that is harmful to minors, and imposes steep fines and prison terms for violators (ACLU v. Reno II). Both Congress and the President approved COPA.

COPA is almost as constricting a law on the first amendment as the Communications Decency Act (ACLU v. Reno II). This unjust law was immediately subjected to a First Amendment challenge by the ACLU and a group of other plaintiffs (COPA Commission). Like the CDA, COPA was stopped before it could begin, the federal district court in Philadelphia issued an injunction preventing the government from enforcing COPA. That court held that COPA was invalid because there is no way for Web speakers to prevent minors from harmful material on the Web without also burdening adults from access to protected speech (ACLU v.

Reno II). The injunction occurred in February of 1999 and if it had not happened than the Internet might not exist today. Another separate court found that any restriction whatsoever on the Internet is in opposition to the first amendment and is therefore not acceptable in America. On June 22, 2000, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found again that COPA was in violation of the first amendment, this time though, Because of the peculiar geography-free nature of cyberspace, [COPA's] community standards test would essentially require every web communication to abide by the most restrictive community's standards (ACLU v. Reno II). A community in an entirely different part of the country could be deciding what is appropriate in another part of the country.

An example of a lawsuit dealing with the Internet censorship argument occurred on July 18, 2002. The American Civil Liberties Union, or ACLU, filed a lawsuit regarding prisoners of Arizona being online and publishing information regarding their own case records (ACLU Press Release: 07 - 18 - 02). The law, entitled Arizona House Bill 2376, bars prisoners from corresponding with a communication service provider or remote computing service and disciplines prisoners if any person outside prison walls accesses a provider or service website at a prisoner's request (ACLU Press Release: 07 - 18 - 02). Although prisoners are locked up for committing crimes, they still deserve some of the rights listed in the first amendment. Even if they tried to get their information off of the Internet, they would be in violation of the law because they would have had to communicate with a service provider (ACLU Press Release: 07 - 18 - 02). Arizona House Bill 2376 is obviously a hypocritical and unjust law.

On July 25, 2002, the ACLU filed a lawsuit in order to force N 2 H 2 Inc. , a software company located in Seattle, to allow researchers to study N 2 H 2 filtering programs and publish results of how the companys software works in computers (ACLU Press Release: 07 - 25 - 02). According to the ACLU, Several studies have documented serious flaws in N 2 H 2 s blocking program and in similar programs (Edelman). The program apparently has a contract that must be signed before use of the program can commence. The contract has an entire list of web sites that may not be accessed under any circumstances. The company in the lawsuit, N 2 H 2 inc. , must allow researchers to investigate how the software works and publish the findings in a way so the consumer and the public involved know what is happening with use of this software. Rather than censoring the Internet, many groups support education about the Internet.

There are numerous ways to protect or educate families about the dangers of the Internet and the uses and advantages of the Internet without censoring the World Wide Web. If Childhood specialists universally criticize parents who allow their children to vegetate in front of the TV unsupervised; [then] the Net raises the same issues of parental responsibility (Wallace). The Internet is just like the television; it is a medium to bring information into a home. Parents, not the United States government, should decide what is not only acceptable, but what is inoffensive, for their children to view online.

Censorship is an issue that should be controlled at home, without the governments supervision. Even if a censorship law were to be passed, Adult supervision of Internet use is the most common way of controlling the information children can access on-line (Day 68). The governments best laid plan for censorship of the Internet, the CDA, doesnt even help the government protect the children that they want to protect (ACLU in the Courts). To clarify, the governments programs to try and stop the distribution of so-called indecent materials will not work at all. Even if the government tries to limit the amount of material that gets through, they will never be able to cut it all off. The idea of a government controlled censorship program is an infringement on Americans rights and is completely unconstitutional.

Besides, internet users can prevent their children from viewing objectionable material, whether sexually explicit or otherwise, by employing inexpensive and easy-to-use blocking and filtering technologies which can filter based on the individual tastes and values of parents, not the federal government (Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition). There are also software alternatives to control that can be strictly enforced by the government. There are several programs that have been created just to filter the World Wide Web and let only what is desired by the user get through. Parents should be responsible enough to watch their childs Internet usage anyway, and filtering software like Net Nanny or Cybersitter can be purchased. The governments censoring is not a guarantee, and Family education imposes little or no cost on publishers of otherwise lawful harmful to minors materials and creates little adverse impact on privacy, First Amendment values, or law enforcement (COPA Commission). There are also other resources that can be used to understand the Internet and its dangers.

Online information, like educational websites, is one of these resources. They do not directly prevent access to harmful to minors materials, online information resources are essential to protecting children, as they can effectively provide access to technologies, information for families online, and hotlines to reach and report to authorities (COPA Commission). Families should be able to find ways to educate themselves about the dangers and advantages of the Internet. There are also Active outreach [programs] to educate families about both the opportunities and dangers of the Internet, as well as the technologies and practices that can optimize a child's experience online -- with a goal of encouraging families' involvement with their children's online experience and wider adoption of common sense practices (COPA Commission).

Parents need to be able to watch their childs online activity and be responsible for the sites that their children visit regardless of how little time the parents have to spend with their children. Parents cannot just let their child or children control their own online experience, getting into things that are not appropriate. This responsibility, although some might see it as the governments, is actually that of the parents. The World Wide Web is an extremely useful tool and does play a major part in society, regardless of the dangers. The Internet has a gigantic role in the growth of technology in America and in the world as well. If the United States government puts any constraints on the Internet, then the First Amendment will be broken.

Due to the freedoms granted to the citizens of the United States by the First Amendment, the Internet should never be censored in America. Works Cited ACLU in the Courts: Reno v. ACLU Supreme Court Brief. 19 Sept. 2002 < web >. ACLU Press Release: 07 - 18 - 02 ACLU Challenges Arizona Law That Censors Anti-Death Penalty Web. 18 July 2002. 19 Sept. 2002 < web >. ACLU Press Release: 07 - 25 - 02 In Legal First, ACLU Sues Over New Copyright Law; Says Blocking. 25 July 2002. 19 Sept. 2002 < web >. ACLU v.

Reno II. 22 May 2002. 17 Sept. 2002 < web speech / copa >. Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition. 18 Sept. 2002 < web background. shtml>. Clark, David. Students Guide to the Internet.

Indianapolis: MacMillan Publishing, 1995. COPA Commission. 19 Sept. 2002 < web >. Day, Nancy. CENSORSHIP or Freedom of Expression? . Minneapolis: Lerner Publications Company, 2001. Edelman. 25 July 2002. 6 Oct. 2002 < web >.

History of the Internet. 6 Oct. 2002 < web >. The Internet's History and Development. 31 Mar. 2002. 6 Oct. 2002 < web >. Wallace, Jonathon. The Internet Censorship FAQ. 18 Sept. 2002 < web >.


Free research essays on topics related to: internet censorship, unjust law, house bill, first amendment, united states government

Research essay sample on United States Government First Amendment

Writing service prices per page

  • $18.85 - in 14 days
  • $19.95 - in 3 days
  • $23.95 - within 48 hours
  • $26.95 - within 24 hours
  • $29.95 - within 12 hours
  • $34.95 - within 6 hours
  • $39.95 - within 3 hours
  • Calculate total price

Our guarantee

  • 100% money back guarantee
  • plagiarism-free authentic works
  • completely confidential service
  • timely revisions until completely satisfied
  • 24/7 customer support
  • payments protected by PayPal

Secure payment

With EssayChief you get

  • Strict plagiarism detection regulations
  • 300+ words per page
  • Times New Roman font 12 pts, double-spaced
  • FREE abstract, outline, bibliography
  • Money back guarantee for missed deadline
  • Round-the-clock customer support
  • Complete anonymity of all our clients
  • Custom essays
  • Writing service

EssayChief can handle your

  • essays, term papers
  • book and movie reports
  • Power Point presentations
  • annotated bibliographies
  • theses, dissertations
  • exam preparations
  • editing and proofreading of your texts
  • academic ghostwriting of any kind

Free essay samples

Browse essays by topic:

Stay with EssayChief! We offer 10% discount to all our return customers. Once you place your order you will receive an email with the password. You can use this password for unlimited period and you can share it with your friends!

Academic ghostwriting

About us

© 2002-2024 EssayChief.com