... if records kept prior were in accordance with previous regs
Still a ton of other stuff to deal with BUT I'm sure that takes a load off a lot of webmaster's minds!
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case No. 05-cv-1126-EDM-BNB
FREE SPEECH COALITION, INC.,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
THE HONORABLE ALBERTO R. GONZALEZ,
Attorney General of the United States,
Defendant.
____________________________________
DEFENDANT?S OPPOSITION TO MOTION
FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
THE HARM THAT PLAINTIFFS ALLEGE DOES NOT PROVIDE A BASIS
FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST ENFORCEMENT
OF THE REGULATIONS
1. The Regulations Present No Ex Post Facto Problem The regulations do not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. As plaintiffs note, that Clause ?makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such act.? Pls? Mot. at 10 (quoting Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386, 390 (1798)). But neither the statute nor the regulations do anything of the sort. Plaintiffs identify no situation in which the regulations might punish someone for a legal act committed prior to their effective date.
Plaintiffs instead present two examples where the application of the new regulations to future actions will, it is claimed, have implications for previously produced pornographic works. The first example relates to the types of identification cards that could previously be used to verify compliance with the regulations and statute.
Plaintiffs are asserting that the old regulations in effect permitted certain foreign-issued identification cards to be used to verify the ages of performers that may no longer be used, Pls? Mot. at 11, but they are incorrect that ?producers who fully complied with the law at the time that the material was produced? are presented with the choice of either ?self-censorship ? or to go back and procure American-issued identification for all actors in earlier-produced sexually explicit works. Id.
Defendant does not interpret the regulations in this fashion, and has no intention of applying them in this fashion. Instead, all producers who fully complied with the old regulations regarding the proper forms of identification will not be precluded from distributing those works merely because such forms of identification will be insufficient going forward. The leading example used by plaintiffs, in otherwords, is not an issue and thus does not reflect a threat of irreparable harm.
Case 1:05-cv-01126-WDM Document 10-1 Filed 06/21/2005 Page 27 of 35
Still a ton of other stuff to deal with BUT I'm sure that takes a load off a lot of webmaster's minds!
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case No. 05-cv-1126-EDM-BNB
FREE SPEECH COALITION, INC.,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
THE HONORABLE ALBERTO R. GONZALEZ,
Attorney General of the United States,
Defendant.
____________________________________
DEFENDANT?S OPPOSITION TO MOTION
FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
THE HARM THAT PLAINTIFFS ALLEGE DOES NOT PROVIDE A BASIS
FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST ENFORCEMENT
OF THE REGULATIONS
1. The Regulations Present No Ex Post Facto Problem The regulations do not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. As plaintiffs note, that Clause ?makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such act.? Pls? Mot. at 10 (quoting Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386, 390 (1798)). But neither the statute nor the regulations do anything of the sort. Plaintiffs identify no situation in which the regulations might punish someone for a legal act committed prior to their effective date.
Plaintiffs instead present two examples where the application of the new regulations to future actions will, it is claimed, have implications for previously produced pornographic works. The first example relates to the types of identification cards that could previously be used to verify compliance with the regulations and statute.
Plaintiffs are asserting that the old regulations in effect permitted certain foreign-issued identification cards to be used to verify the ages of performers that may no longer be used, Pls? Mot. at 11, but they are incorrect that ?producers who fully complied with the law at the time that the material was produced? are presented with the choice of either ?self-censorship ? or to go back and procure American-issued identification for all actors in earlier-produced sexually explicit works. Id.
Defendant does not interpret the regulations in this fashion, and has no intention of applying them in this fashion. Instead, all producers who fully complied with the old regulations regarding the proper forms of identification will not be precluded from distributing those works merely because such forms of identification will be insufficient going forward. The leading example used by plaintiffs, in otherwords, is not an issue and thus does not reflect a threat of irreparable harm.
Case 1:05-cv-01126-WDM Document 10-1 Filed 06/21/2005 Page 27 of 35
Comment