The Federalist Society has a SCOTUS podcast on the U.S. Supreme Court's May 19, 2008 decision in United States v. Williams. The SCOTUScast features commentary by Elizabeth Harmer Dionne, the John M. Olin Fellow in Law at Harvard Law School. Dionne specializes First Amendment issues, particularly freedom of religion and obscenity law.
The Williams case addressed section 2252A(a)(3)(B) of Title 18 U.S.C., which Congress passed after the Supreme Court's decision in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. Section 2252A(a)(3)(B), the "Protect Act", prohibits knowingly advertising, promoting, presenting, distributing or soliciting material in a manner that reflects the belief, or is intended to cause another to believe, that the material is illegal child pornography. Williams challenged the provision as violating his First Amendment rights. The District Court rejected his claim, but the Eleventh Circuit reversed, finding the statute both overbroad and impermissibly vague under the Due Process Clause. In an opinion authored by Justice Scalia, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed. Justices Souter and Ginsburg dissented.
Dionne's commentary reviews the Supreme Court's decision and addresses the First Amendment implications of the "Protect Act". She also suggests that because pornography advocates have successfully classified child pornography as speech, placing it within the protections of the First Amendment, we must continue to question whether any child pornography qualifies as speech. There will certainly be more court cases addressing this issue.