US to ban pornography, all ‘adult content' websites? Here's what Interstate Obscenity Definition Act says
Senator Mike Lee, a Republican from Utah, has filed a new bill that would redefine what is legally considered 'obscene' and implement a nationwide ban on pornography.
The Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA), a piece of legislation, aims to update Supreme Court's decades-old standard for prosecuting obscene content online.
If IODA gets approved, it could significantly alter federal law's treatment of sexual content, particularly in online contexts.
Speaking to Mashable, adult industry attorney Corey D. Silverstein said, 'It may as well be an outright ban on pornography because basically, under [Lee's] definition, all adult entertainment, all forms of pornography, will be deemed obscene.'
Representative Mary Miller of Illinois has co-sponsored the bill, which was submitted on Thursday. Notably, this is Lee's third attempt to enact legislation of this kind since 2022.
Also Read: Trump asks Saudi Crown Prince MBS 'How Do You Sleep at Night?' in bizarre speech, takes dig at Tim Cook
It would update the profanity test that has been used by regulators since the Miller v. California ruling of the Supreme Court in 1973. Critics claim that this criteria is out of date and challenging to implement, particularly in the digital age.
If approved, the bill will permit for federal limitations or prohibitions on online pornography and allow for the prosecution of pornographic material that is distributed across state lines or from other nations.
It may criminalize a lot of adult content, including consenting displays of sexuality, and expand the types of graphic information that could be classified as federal crimes.
Taking to X, Utah Senator Lee wrote: 'Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. But hazy, unenforceable definitions have allowed pornography companies to infect our society, peddle smut to children, and do business across state lines unimpeded.'
This is the first and most important step in preventing the individuals and businesses who make money by dehumanizing their fellow humans and destroying countless lives, he added.
This month, the Congress will consider the proposal, However, it is unclear whether it will have bipartisan support.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Judge grants preliminary injunction to protect collective bargaining agreement for TSA workers
SEATTLE — A federal judge on Monday granted a preliminary injunction to stop Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem from killing a collective bargaining agreement for Transportation Safety Administration workers. U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman of Seattle said in her order that an injunction is needed to preserve the rights and benefits that TSA workers have enjoyed for years while being represented by the American Federation of Government Employees. In their lawsuit, Pechman said, the union has shown that Noem's directive to end the agreement 'constitutes impermissible retaliation against it for its unwillingness to acquiesce to the Trump Administration's assault on federal workers.' It also likely violated due process and AFGE is likely to succeed in showing that Noem's decision was 'arbitrary and capricious," she added. 'Today's court decision is a crucial victory for federal workers and the rule of law,' AFGE National President Everett Kelley said in a release. 'The preliminary injunction underscores the unconstitutional nature of DHS's attack on TSA officers' First Amendment rights. We remain committed to ensuring our members' rights and dignity are protected, and we will not back down from defending our members' rights against unlawful union busting.' Messages left for Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Kipnis seeking comment were not immediately returned. AFGE had entered into a new, seven-year collective bargaining agreement with agency last May, but Noem issued a memo Feb. 27 rescinding that agreement. One week later, TSA informed the union about Noem's directive, saying the contract was terminated and all pending grievances would be deleted. AFGE filed a lawsuit against Noem, claiming the move was retaliation against the union for pushing back against the Trump administration's attacks on federal workers. AFGE had filed a separate lawsuit Feb. 19 against the Office of Personnel Management to stop the firing of probationary workers. A judge issued a temporary restraining order Feb. 27 stopping the firings — the same day Noem issued her memo. Abigail Carter, representing AFGE during oral arguments before Pechman on May 27, said Noem's move was retaliation and a violation of the union's First Amendment right to protected speech and its Fifth Amendment right to due process. 'The administration has made it clear that if you don't disagree with it politically, you and your members can keep your rights, but if you do disagree, you lose them,' Carter said. She also argued that the collective bargaining agreement was necessary because TSA workers are not covered under the federal labor-management code. The agreement protects them from dangerous working conditions and unreasonable hours. Kipnis denied the retaliation claim and said it was simply a difference in management styles. Pechman questioned that contention. Not all unions are banned by the administration, Pechman said, only the ones oppose the administration. 'Isn't this a pattern that you see?' Pechman asked Kipnis. 'Attorneys who take opposition stances get banned. Those who don't, don't have those restrictions. Isn't this the pattern that the White House has set up?" Kipnis said tension between unions and management are common and this conflict doesn't signal a violation of the workers' First Amendment rights, but instead reflects a confrontational relationship. But Pechman wasn't convinced. Previous TSA managers have found unions to be beneficial and renewed their contracts for years, she said. They found they made a happier workforce, and 'they wanted their employees to feel that they were well-treated,' she said. What has changed is this administration's attitude, she said. To that, Kipnis replied: 'Or you could characterize it as a different management style. The former administration apparently saw that as a better way to do business. ... But this administration sees a different way of doing business. And the same statute affords them the same amount of discretion.' Pechman said she understood that the administration has the right to exercise that discretion, 'but to abruptly cancel doesn't seem well reasoned, so I'm having trouble with that." She also noted, "But why the United States gets to back out of contracts that it's made is harder to accept.' In Monday's order, Pechman said TSA workers would suffer 'irreparable harm' without the injunction, noting that if they lose their collective bargaining agreement, they will lose the benefits it provides. 'While the loss of money alone does not show irreparable harm, the total harms here are more than monetary,' Pechman said. 'They include the loss of substantive employment protections, avenues of grievance and arbitration, and the right to have a workforce that can unite to demand benefits that might not be obtainable through individual negotiation.'
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Assam man says mother detained, Supreme Court to hear plea
The Supreme Court has agreed to take up next week a Habeas Corpus petition filed by a man from Assam, who alleged that his mother has been picked up for deportation, and her whereabouts since then are not known. Initially, the Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma said it will tag the petition with a pending plea on illegal immigrants. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, however, urged the court to issue notice so that the State can reply. 'We don't know. Son doesn't know. Let them say. If she is in Bangladesh, it's another matter,' Sibal said, contending that the arrest of the petitioner's mother violated norms on arrest laid down by the SC in the D K Basu case. 'Your Lordships know she has to be produced within 24 hours. She is not produced. Picked up from the house. Directly in violation of the D K Basu judgment. SP (Superintendent of Police) goes to the house, picks her up and throws her. How can that be?' the senior counsel submitted. The petitioner, 26-year-old Iunuch (Yunus) Ali, has alleged that his mother Monowara Bewa was detained on May 24 after being called to the Dhubri police station on the pretext of recording her statement. The plea also sought a direction restraining the deportation or 'push back' of the detainee across any Indian border. Sibal said that the woman had previously filed a special leave petition (SLP) in the apex court, which is still pending, and that she had also been granted bail, yet she was being 'thrown out'. The SLP challenges the decision of the Gauhati High Court, which upheld a Foreigners Tribunal ruling declaring Bewa a foreigner – a decision that has remained under challenge before the apex court since 2017. Bewa was on bail since December 12, 2019, following a Supreme Court order in this regard. The court issued notice and fixed the hearing for early next week. The top court, however, refused to entertain a plea challenging the Assam government's move to deport Bangladeshis who have entered the country illegally. The Bench asked the petitioner, the All BTC Minority Students Union (ABMSU), to approach the Guwahati High Court. '69 people are being deported, please go to the Guwahati High Court,' the court said. On February 4, a Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan had asked the state to do the needful to deport 63 declared foreigners. The government had then said that it was awaiting confirmation of their nationality. They were subsequently confirmed to be Bangladeshi nationals. The petition alleged that using this order as an excuse, the state 'has reportedly launched a sweeping and indiscriminate drive to detain and deport individuals suspected to be foreigners, even in the absence of Foreigners Tribunal declarations, nationality verification, or exhaustion of legal remedies.' Citing some of the alleged deportations, the plea argued that 'these instances are not isolated, but part of an emerging pattern where individuals are detained and deported without Foreigners Tribunal declarations, nationality verification by the MEA, or even an opportunity to appeal.' 'These instances reflect a growing pattern of deportations conducted by the Assam Police and administrative machinery through informal 'push back' mechanisms, without any judicial oversight or adherence to the safeguards envisaged by the Constitution of India or this court,' the ABMSU claimed.– With PTI
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
US demands final trade offers by Wednesday as tariff deadline nears
With just five weeks until a self-imposed deadline and global markets watching closely, the Trump administration is accelerating trade negotiations with multiple countries, urging them to submit their "best offers" by to a draft letter seen by Reuters, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is pressing countries to outline top-line proposals in key areas such as tariff cuts, quota allocations for US industrial and agricultural goods, and removal of non-tariff trade move comes as the administration attempts to wrap up complex negotiations that began on April 9, when President Donald Trump paused his sweeping "Liberation Day" tariffs for 90 days after a market backlash. That temporary pause ends on July 8. The letter outlines an aggressive timeline, reflecting a growing sense of urgency inside the White House. "Productive negotiations with many key trading partners continue at a rapid pace. It is in all parties' interest to take stock of progress and assess any next steps," a USTR official told administration officials, including White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett, have repeatedly signalled that multiple agreements are "nearing completion," only one limited deal has emerged so far — with Britain. That agreement, however, is widely viewed as a loose framework for ongoing talks, rather than a final draft letter reportedly calls for detailed responses on digital trade, economic security, and country-specific commitments. Once proposals are submitted, the US plans to evaluate them "within days" and provide what the letter refers to as "a possible landing zone," potentially including reciprocal tariff the draft doesn't specify recipient nations, it's understood to target countries currently in active negotiations, including the European Union, Japan, Vietnam, and ambitious -- and often frenetic -- tariff policy represents a major part of his "America First" economic agenda as he seeks to reshape US trade relationships, reduce trade deficits and protect American industries. Republican lawmakers are also banking on tariffs to add to federal revenue and offset the cost of the tax-cut legislation now working its way through twists and turns in Trump's tariff policies have taken investors on a rollercoaster ride. In May, US stocks held their biggest rally of any month since November 2023, but that was after global indexes had cratered under the barrage of Trump's tariff announcements throughout February, March and early inputs from ReutersTune InMust Watch
