The Government first contends that, even though the [Communications Decency Act] effectively censors discourse on many of the Internet's modalities - such as chat groups, newsgroups, and mail exploders - it is nonetheless constitutional because it provides a "reasonable opportunity" for speakers to engage in the restricted speech on the World Wide Web.... The Government's position is equivalent to arguing that a statute could ban leaflets on certain subjects as long as individuals are free to publish books.... One is not to have the exercise of his liberty of expression in appropriate places abridged on the plea that it may be exercised in some other place.
Source: 1997, Janet Reno et al. v. ACLU et al. [Interior quotes and citations omitted]
Contributed by: Zaady