The War on Porn Regular Updates about the Assault on The Adult Industry
The American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative think tank, has raised concerns about the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Free Speech Coalition et al. v. Paxton. In a briefing published on Tuesday, Clay Calvert, a nonresident senior fellow at AEI for technology policy studies, laid out the basis for the criticism.
Calvert argued that the Court’s conservative majority created a carve-out in First Amendment protections for controversial forms of expression, such as adult content.
“To grease the skids for a decision that burdens First Amendment rights, it helps to denigrate the group that’s fighting for free speech subtly,” Calvert wrote in his AEI blog post.
Calvert is professor of law emeritus at the University of Florida’s Levin College of Law and Brechner Eminent Scholar Emeritus at the College of Journalism and Communications, with expertise in First Amendment case law and communications policy.
He noted that the Free Speech Coalition (FSC)—which describes itself as “the trade association of the adult entertainment industry based in the United States”—was characterized differently in the Court’s opinion. While FSC’s website does not use the socially stigmatized term “pornography,” Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, referred to it as “a trade association for the pornography industry.”
“Semantics matter because under U.S. law, there are three distinct categories of sexual speech: obscenity, child pornography, and variable obscenity,” Calvert explained. “Notably, pornography is not a legal term; it’s just a disparagingly loaded word. Thomas unloaded it against the FSC, making it just that much easier for adults to stomach a decision burdening their own First Amendment rights.”
