Yesterday a bill passed through the House of Representatives that will make changes to 2257 and then ADD a section that would require 2257 data be maintained for "simulated sexual conduct". [2257 A ]
Many of the arguments in the FSC case hinge on the theory that the Attorney General cannot define "secondary producers" because that goes farther than the law [which Congress makes] allows. If Congress includes "secondary producers" under 2257 then the best argument against it would be that the law is overbroad or unconstitutional in some way, a more difficult argument to win.
The language in the bill is confusing, and I still have not come up with a good interpretation as to what its effects would be. The most important section is Section 602.
The bill is House Resolution 4472
Many of the arguments in the FSC case hinge on the theory that the Attorney General cannot define "secondary producers" because that goes farther than the law [which Congress makes] allows. If Congress includes "secondary producers" under 2257 then the best argument against it would be that the law is overbroad or unconstitutional in some way, a more difficult argument to win.
The language in the bill is confusing, and I still have not come up with a good interpretation as to what its effects would be. The most important section is Section 602.
The bill is House Resolution 4472
Comment