Repository landing page

We are not able to resolve this OAI Identifier to the repository landing page. If you are the repository manager for this record, please head to the Dashboard and adjust the settings.

The Dormant Commerce Clause and State Regulation of the Internet: Are Laws Protecting Minors From Sexual Predators Constitutionally Different Than Those Protecting Minors From Sexually Explicit Materials?

Abstract

Several states have enacted statutes to protect minors from harmful or obscene materials disseminated over the Internet, as well as from pedophiles seeking to use the Internet to lure them into sexual conduct. State and federal courts have diverged in their analysis of the Dormant Commerce Clause\u27s impact on state regulation in these areas. While state courts have held that the Dormant Commerce Clause does not invalidate state luring statutes, federal courts have been consistent in finding state dissemination statutes unconstitutional. This iBrief summarizes recent state and federal jurisprudence in this area and concludes that state courts have not been successful in distinguishing state luring statutes from federal case law on state dissemination statutes. Therefore, state courts have prematurely aborted the Dormant Commerce Clause examination

Similar works

This paper was published in Duke Law Scholarship Repository.

Having an issue?

Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.