Pornhub and other ‘adult content' websites facing ban in the US? New bill says 'Yes'
Pornhub and other 'adult content' websites facing ban in the US? New bill says 'Yes'
A newly proposed bill in the United States Congress could bring sweeping changes to the legal landscape of
online pornography
. The legislation, known as the
Interstate Obscenity Definition Act
(IODA), was introduced by Utah Republican
Senator Mike Lee
and co-sponsored by Representative Mary Miller of Illinois. According to
The Economic Times
report, if enacted, the bill would redefine what constitutes "obscene" content under
federal law
, potentially making a wide range of adult material illegal across the country.
This significant shift could impact content creators, platforms, and consumers, raising critical questions about free speech, digital privacy, and the future of online expression. Given the potential for far-reaching effects, this proposal has sparked intense debate among lawmakers, legal experts, and civil rights advocates.
What is the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA)
The Interstate Obscenity Definition Act is a legislative effort to revise the federal definition of obscenity, which has remained largely unchanged for decades. Currently, the definition of obscene material is based on the 1973 Supreme Court decision in Miller v. California, which established a three-part standard, commonly known as the "Miller Test." For content to be considered legally obscene under this test, it must:
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Trending in in 2025: Local network access control [Click Here]
Esseps
Learn More
Undo
Appeal to prurient (sexual) interests,
Depict sexual conduct in a patently offensive way according to contemporary community standards,
Lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
The IODA seeks to eliminate much of this nuance by creating a stricter, more straightforward definition, as reported by
The Economic Times
. It proposes that any material that appeals to prurient interests in nudity, sex, or excretion, and depicts or describes sexual acts with the intent to arouse, could be classified as obscene. Notably, the bill removes the requirement to prove the "intent" of distribution, a significant departure from the existing Communications Act of 1934. This change would make it easier for federal authorities to prosecute cases involving sexually explicit content, even if the creators did not specifically intend to distribute such material as obscene.
Key provisions of the IODA
The IODA introduces several critical changes to existing obscenity laws, including:
Broader definition of obscenity: Removes the requirement for community standards and intent, focusing solely on the content itself.
Stricter federal oversight: Extends federal jurisdiction over obscene material distributed across state lines or internationally, regardless of local laws.
Removal of artistic or scientific exemptions: Omits the current requirement to assess the artistic, scientific, political, or literary value of the content.
Focus on online distribution: Specifically targets digital platforms and websites that host or distribute adult content, reflecting the realities of the internet age.
Senator Mike Lee's rationale for the bill
In a recent post on X (formerly Twitter), Senator Mike Lee argued that the current legal definitions of obscenity are too vague and difficult to enforce, allowing the adult entertainment industry to operate largely unchecked. He stated, "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." Lee emphasized that the IODA is intended to close these loopholes and provide a more robust legal framework to combat what he views as the harmful effects of pornography.
This is not Lee's first attempt to tighten federal obscenity laws. He introduced similar bills in both 2022 and 2023, although those efforts failed to gain sufficient support. However, this latest version, with its more streamlined approach, may have a better chance of advancing through Congress.
Impact on online pornography and free speech
If passed, the IODA could have profound implications for the adult entertainment industry and digital free speech in the United States. Critics argue that the bill's broad definition of obscenity could criminalize a wide range of consensual adult content, including materials that may lack "serious artistic or scientific value" but are still widely accepted in modern culture. This raises concerns about potential overreach and censorship, particularly given the bill's removal of the "community standards" clause, which has historically served as a buffer against overly restrictive interpretations of obscenity.
Additionally, the bill's focus on digital distribution could pose significant challenges for online platforms. Many adult websites are hosted or accessed across multiple states or even international borders, potentially exposing them to federal prosecution if the bill becomes law.
What makes the IODA different from past obscenity laws
The key distinction between the IODA and previous obscenity laws is its simplified, more aggressive approach to defining and prosecuting obscene material. Unlike the Miller Test, which requires a nuanced assessment of local community standards and artistic value, the IODA focuses solely on the nature of the content itself. This shift reflects a broader trend among conservative lawmakers to crack down on what they see as harmful digital content, regardless of artistic intent or regional cultural differences.
Moreover, the IODA directly targets the modern realities of digital communication, which the original 1973 ruling could not have anticipated. By removing the "intent" clause, the bill lowers the bar for prosecution, potentially making it easier for federal authorities to bring cases against content creators, platforms, and even individual users.
Next steps for the bill in Congress
The IODA is currently under consideration in Congress, where it will likely face a challenging path to passage. While it may attract support among conservative lawmakers, it is expected to encounter significant opposition from free speech advocates, digital rights organizations, and some business groups. The bill's success will depend largely on whether it can garner bipartisan support, a critical factor in the current polarized political environment.
For now, the bill is gaining attention not only for its potential legal impact but also for the broader cultural debate it has sparked over the role of adult content in American society.
Also read |
Airtel recharge plans
|
Jio recharge plans
|
BSNL recharge plans
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
US court won't lift judge's block on Trump's government overhaul
A U.S. appeals court upheld a block on the Trump administration's plans for mass federal worker layoffs and agency restructuring. The court denied the administration's request to pause a lower court ruling, which stated the president needs congressional approval for such actions. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads A U.S. appeals court on Friday refused to pause a judge's ruling blocking President Donald Trump's administration from carrying out mass layoffs of federal workers and a restructuring of government agencies as part of a sweeping government decision by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals means that, for now, the Trump administration cannot proceed with plans to shed tens of thousands of federal jobs and shutter many government offices and programs.U.S. District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco on May 22 blocked large-scale layoffs at about 20 federal agencies, agreeing with a group of unions, nonprofits and municipalities that the president may only restructure agencies when authorized by Congress.A three-judge 9th Circuit panel on Friday denied the Trump administration's bid to stay Illston's decision pending an appeal, which could take months to resolve. The administration will likely now ask the U.S. Supreme Court to pause the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment."The Ninth Circuit's decision today rightfully maintains the block on the Trump-Vance administration's unlawful, disruptive, and destructive reorganization of the federal government," said a statement from the coalition of court said the administration had not provided any evidence it would suffer an irreparable injury if the lower court order remained in place and said plaintiffs were likely to prevail."The executive order at issue here far exceeds the president's supervisory powers under the Constitution," said the majority opinion from Judge William Fletcher, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton. He was joined by Judge Lucy Koh, who was appointed by Democratic President Joe Consuelo Callahan, who was appointed by Republican President George W. Bush, dissented, saying the administration was likely to succeed on appeal and had suffered irreparable harm from having its policy OVERHAULIllston's ruling was the broadest of its kind against the government overhaul that was spearheaded by Trump ally Elon Musk, the world's richest person and CEO of electric vehicle maker Tesla. Along with blocking layoffs, Illston barred the Department of Government Efficiency from ordering job cuts or reorganization at federal of lawsuits have challenged DOGE's work on various grounds, including claims that it violated labor and privacy laws and exceeded its authority, with mixed results. Two judges had separately ordered the Trump administration to reinstate thousands of probationary employees, who are typically newer hires and were fired en masse in February, but appeals courts paused those joined a farewell event in the Oval Office with Trump on Friday, marking the end of his active involvement with the in February also directed government agencies to work with DOGE to identify targets for mass layoffs as part of the administration's restructuring Republican president urged agencies to eliminate duplicative roles, unnecessary management layers, and non-critical jobs, while automating routine tasks, closing regional offices and reducing the use of outside contractors. Most federal agencies have announced plans to lay off large numbers of workers, including 10,000 staffers at health Friday's case, the unions and groups that sued said only Congress has the authority to create agencies, shape their missions and decide their funding levels, and large-scale layoffs undermine that also an appointee of Clinton, had said in her ruling that the plaintiffs were likely to suffer a range of irreparable harms if the layoffs were said, for example, that a U.S. Department of Labor office in Pittsburgh that researches health hazards facing mineworkers would lose all but one of its 222 gave similar examples at local offices of Head Start, which supports early learning, the Farm Service Agency and the Social Security Administration.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
41 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Appeals court keeps block on Trump admin's downsizing of federal workforce
An appeals court on Friday refused to freeze a California judge's order halting the Trump administration from downsizing the federal workforce, which means that DOGE-led cuts remain on pause for now. The Republican administration had sought an emergency stay of an injunction issued by US Judge Susan Illston of San Francisco in a lawsuit brought by labour unions and cities, including San Francisco and Chicago. The judge's order questioned whether Trump's administration was acting lawfully in trying to pare the federal workforce. Trump has repeatedly said voters gave him a mandate to remake the federal government, and he tapped billionaire Elon Musk to lead the charge through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Tens of thousands of federal workers have been fired, have left their jobs via deferred resignation programmes or have been placed on leave. There is no official figure for the job cuts, but at least 75,000 federal employees took deferred resignation, and thousands of probationary workers have already been let go. Illston's order directs numerous federal agencies to halt acting on the president's workforce executive order signed in February and a subsequent memo issued by DOGE and the Office of Personnel Management. Illston, who was nominated to the bench by former president Bill Clinton, a Democrat, wrote in her ruling that presidents can make large-scale overhauls of federal agencies, but only with the cooperation of Congress. Lawyers for the government say that the executive order and memo calling for large-scale personnel reductions and reorganization plans provided only general principles that agencies should follow in exercising their own decision-making process. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
On the campaign trail, Elon Musk juggled drugs and family drama
Elon Musk As Elon Musk became one of Donald Trump's closest allies last year, leading raucous rallies and donating about $275 million to help him win the presidency, he was also using drugs far more intensely than previously known, according to people familiar with his activities. Musk's drug consumption went well beyond occasional use. He told people he was taking so much ketamine, a powerful anesthetic, that it was affecting his bladder, a known effect of chronic use. He took Ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms. And he traveled with a daily medication box that held about 20 pills, including ones with the markings of the stimulant Adderall, according to a photo of the box and people who have seen it. It is unclear whether Musk, 53, was taking drugs when he became a fixture at the White House this year and was handed the power to slash the federal bureaucracy. But he has exhibited erratic behavior, insulting Cabinet members, gesturing like a Nazi and garbling his answers in a staged interview. At the same time, Musk's family life has grown increasingly tumultuous as he has negotiated overlapping romantic relationships and private legal battles involving his growing brood of children, according to documents and interviews. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Switch to UnionBank Rewards Card UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo On Wednesday evening, Musk announced that he was ending his stint with the government, after lamenting how much time he had spent on politics instead of his businesses. Musk and his lawyer did not respond to requests for comment this week about his drug use and personal life. He has previously said he was prescribed ketamine for depression, taking it about every two weeks. And he told his biographer, "I really don't like doing illegal drugs." The White House did not respond to questions about whether it had asked Musk to take drug tests. After this article was published on Friday morning, Harrison Fields, a White House spokesperson, issued a statement to The New York Times crediting Musk with helping cut government waste. He declined to comment on Musk's drug use. As a large government contractor, Musk's aerospace firm, SpaceX, must maintain a drug-free workforce and administers random drug tests to its employees. But Musk has received advance warning of the tests, according to people close to the process. SpaceX did not respond to questions about those warnings. Musk, who joined the president's inner circle after making a vast fortune on cars, satellites and rocket ships, has long been known for grandiose statements and a mercurial personality. Supporters see him as an eccentric genius whose slash-and-burn management style is key to his success. But last year, as he jumped into the political arena, some people who knew him worried about his frequent drug use, mood swings and fixation on having more children. This account of his behavior is based on private messages obtained by The New York Times as well as interviews with more than a dozen people who have known or worked with him. This year, some of his longtime friends have renounced him, pointing to some of his public conduct. "Elon has pushed the boundaries of his bad behavior more and more," said Philip Low, a neuroscientist and onetime friend of Musk's who criticized him for his Nazi-like gesture at a rally. And some women are challenging Musk for control of their children. One of his former partners, Claire Boucher, the musician known as Grimes, has been fighting with Musk over their 5-year-old son, known as X. Musk is extremely attached to the boy, taking him to the Oval Office and high-profile gatherings that are broadcast around the world. Boucher has privately complained that the appearances violate a custody settlement in which she and Musk agreed to try to keep their children out of the public eye, according to people familiar with her concerns and the provision, which has not been previously reported. She has told people that she worries about the boy's safety, and that frequent travel and sleep deprivation are harming his health. Another mother, the right-leaning writer Ashley St. Clair, revealed in February that she had a secret relationship with Musk and had given birth to his 14th known child. Musk offered her a large settlement to keep his paternity concealed, but she refused. He sought a gag order in New York to force St. Clair to stop speaking publicly, she said in an interview. A Ketamine Habit Musk has described some of his mental health issues in interviews and on social media, saying in one post that he has felt "great highs, terrible lows and unrelenting stress." He has denounced traditional therapy and antidepressants. He plays video games for hours on end. He struggles with binge eating, according to people familiar with his habits, and takes weight-loss medication. And he posts day and night on his social media platform, X. Musk has a history of recreational drug use, The Wall Street Journal reported last year. Some board members at Tesla, his electric vehicle company, have worried about his use of drugs, including Ambien, a sleep medication. In an interview in March 2024, journalist Don Lemon pressed him on his drug use. Musk said he took only "a small amount" of ketamine, about once every two weeks, as a prescribed treatment for negative moods. "If you've used too much ketamine, you can't really get work done, and I have a lot of work," he said. He had actually developed a far more serious habit, the Times found. Musk had been using ketamine often, sometimes daily, and mixing it with other drugs, according to people familiar with his consumption. The line between medical use and recreation was blurry, troubling some people close to him. He also took Ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms at private gatherings across the United States and in at least one other country, according to those who attended the events. The Food and Drug Administration has formally approved the use of ketamine only as an anesthetic in medical procedures. Doctors with a special license may prescribe it for psychiatric disorders like depression. But the agency has warned about its risks, which came into sharp relief after the death of actor Matthew Perry. The drug has psychedelic properties and can cause dissociation from reality. Chronic use can lead to addiction and problems with bladder pain and control. By the spring of last year, Musk was ramping up criticism of President Joe Biden, particularly his policies on illegal immigration and diversity initiatives. Musk was also facing federal investigations into his businesses. Regulators were looking into crashes of Tesla's self-driving cars and allegations of racism at its factories, among other complaints. "There are at least half a dozen initiatives of significance to take me down," he wrote in a text message to someone close to him last May. "The Biden administration views me as the #2 threat after Trump." "I can't be president, but I can help Trump defeat Biden and I will," he added. He publicly endorsed Trump in July. Around that time, Musk told people that his ketamine use was causing bladder issues, according to people familiar with the conversations. On Oct. 5, he appeared with Trump at a rally for the first time, bouncing up and down around the candidate. That evening, Musk shared his excitement with a person close to him. "I'm feeling more optimistic after tonight," he wrote in a text message. "Tomorrow we unleash the anomaly in the matrix." "This is not something on the chessboard, so they will be quite surprised," Musk added about an hour later. "'Lasers' from space." After Trump won, Musk rented a cottage at Mar-a-Lago, the president-elect's Florida resort, to assist with the transition. Musk attended personnel meetings and sat in on phone calls with foreign leaders. And he crafted plans to overhaul the federal government under the new Department of Government Efficiency. Family Secrets Musk has also been juggling the messy consequences of his efforts to produce more babies. By 2022, Musk, who has married and divorced three times, had fathered six children in his first marriage (including one who died in infancy), as well as two with Boucher. She told people she believed they were in a monogamous relationship and building a family together. But while a surrogate was pregnant with their third child, Boucher was furious to discover that Musk had recently fathered twins with Shivon Zilis, an executive at his brain implant company, Neuralink, according to people familiar with the situation. Musk was by then sounding an alarm that the world's declining birthrates would lead to the end of civilization, publicly encouraging people to have children and donating $10 million to a research initiative on population growth. Privately, he was spending time with Simone and Malcolm Collins, prominent figures in the emerging pronatalist movement, and urging his wealthy friends to have as many children as possible. He believed the world needed more intelligent people, according to people aware of the conversations. Collins declined to comment on his relationship with Musk, but said, "Elon is one of the people taking this cause seriously." Even as Musk fathered more children, he favored his son X. By the fall of 2022, during a period when he and Boucher were broken up, he began traveling with the boy for days at a time, often without providing advance notice, according to people familiar with his actions. Boucher reconciled with Musk, only to get another unpleasant surprise. In August 2023, she learned that Zilis was expecting a third child with Musk via surrogacy and was pregnant with their fourth. Boucher and Musk began a contentious custody battle, during which Musk kept X for months. They eventually signed the joint custody agreement that specified keeping their children out of the spotlight. By mid-2023, unknown to either Boucher or Zilis, Musk had started a romantic relationship with St. Clair, the writer, who lives in New York City. St. Clair said in an interview that at first, Musk told her he wasn't dating anyone else. But when she was about six months pregnant, he acknowledged that he was romantically involved with Zilis, who went on to become a more visible fixture in Musk's life. St. Clair said that Musk told her he had fathered children around the world, including one with a Japanese pop star. He said he would be willing to give his sperm to anyone who wanted to have a child. "He made it seem like it was just his altruism and he generally believed these people should just have children," St. Clair said. St. Clair said that when she was in a delivery room giving birth in September, Musk told her over disappearing Signal messages that he wanted to keep his paternity and their relationship quiet. On election night, St. Clair and Musk both went to Mar-a-Lago to celebrate Trump's victory. But she had to pretend that she hardly knew him, she said. He offered her $15 million and $100,000 a month until their son turned 21, in exchange for her silence, according to documents reviewed by the Times and first reported by the Journal. But she did not want her son's paternity to be hidden. After she went public in February, ahead of a tabloid story, she sued Musk to acknowledge paternity and, later, to get emergency child support. Musk sought a gag order, claiming that any publicity involving the child, or comments by St. Clair on her experience, would be a security risk for the boy. 'No Sympathy for This Behavior' Some of Musk's onetime friends have aired concerns about what they considered toxic public behavior. In a January newsletter explaining why their friendship had ended, Sam Harris, a public intellectual, wrote that Musk had used his social media platform to defame people and promote lies. "There is something seriously wrong with his moral compass, if not his perception of reality," Harris wrote. Later that month, at a Trump inauguration event, Musk thumped his chest and thrust his hand diagonally upward, resembling a fascist salute. "My heart goes out to you," he told the crowd. "It is thanks to you that the future of civilization is assured." Musk dismissed the resulting public outcry, saying he had made a "positive gesture." Low, who is chief executive of NeuroVigil, a neurotechnology company, was outraged by the performance. He wrote Musk a sharp email, shared with the Times, cursing him "for giving the Nazi salute." When Musk didn't respond to the message, Low posted his concerns on social media. "I have no sympathy for this behavior," he wrote on Facebook, referring to the gesture as well as other behaviors. "At some point, after having repeatedly confronted it in private, I believe the ethical thing to do is to speak out, forcefully and unapologetically." The next month, Musk once again found himself under scrutiny, this time for an appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference outside Washington. As he walked onto the stage, he was handed a chain saw from one of his political allies, Javier Milei, the president of Argentina. "This is the chain saw for bureaucracy!" Musk shouted to the cheering crowd. Some conference organizers told the Times that they did not notice anything out of the ordinary about his behavior behind the scenes. But during an onstage interview, he spoke in disjointed bouts of stuttering and laughing, with sunglasses on. Clips of it went viral as many viewers speculated about possible drug use.
