What's next in Washington?

More legislation likely, but Clinton may withdraw support

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court's decision to reject the Communications Decency Act has elicited whoops of joy from free-speech advocates and dire warnings from anti- pornography groups about children's access to smut over the Internet.

But the fight over decency and free speech in cyberspace, while greatly affected by the ruling, is far from over. The Communications Decency Act conceivably could be rewritten to address the court's objections while still restricting the transmission of obscene or indecent material across the Internet.

That would mean another fight in Congress, another decision for the White House, and, perhaps, another court battle.

Will Congress try again?

Even with the retirement of the CDA's main Senate sponsor, Nebraska Democrat James Exon, some members of Congress have pledged to try to fashion a new version of the CDA that would be more likely to stand up in court. When the Supreme Court heard CDA arguments in March, Senator Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, a staunch supporter of the Act, told Pathfinder's Netly News that he was ready to try again.

"How to do this I don't know," Grassley said. "But our objective hasn't changed. Some way, somehow, we will have to find a constitutional way of doing this for kids, protecting them from porn the way we did for printed material."

Representative Bob Goodlatte, R-Virginia, another CDA supporter, said he hopes the Supreme Court "will give the Congress some very clear guidance" on how to proceed with future legislation.

Whither the White house?

But the White House may be preparing to back away from its previous support for using the long arm of the federal government to restrict access to indecent material on the Internet, according to a report in the June 16 issue of the New York Times.

In anticipation of the Supreme Court's ruling, an administration working group has been fashioning a new policy that would leave the on-line world substantially self- regulated, according to the Times.

A draft of the new policy states that "unnecessary regulation or censorship could cripple the growth and diversity of the Internet."

Clinton has not signed off on new policy

The Times reported President Bill Clinton has not signed off on the self-regulation concept. But a draft position paper outlining the new policy has been prepared for possible announcement.

The group pushing for the change inside the White House is reportedly led by adviser Ira Magaziner, architect of the president's ill-fated health care reform plan during his first term.

However, another administration official told the Times that the work of Magaziner's group did not represent a policy reversal. Rather, said the official, it was "prudent planning" for a new policy in the wake of the court's ruling.

The new draft policy states that because filtering devices are available to let parents limit what their children can view, it is not necessary to extend content restrictions, similar to radio or television, to the Internet, the Times reported.

© 1997 Cable News Network, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

Terms under which this service is provided to you.