Cyberspace Ruling

On the basis that the Child Online Protection Act is “constitutionally flawed,” Judge Lowell A. Reed Jr. ruled that free speech must prevail vis-a-vis interference with the proliferation of material deemed “harmful to minors” (Feb. 2). Thus, in line with Roe vs. Wade and countless other decisions against children, born and unborn, our courts now deem it illegal for Congress to protect our kids from Internet peddlers of nudity and filth.

By passing the Child Online Protection Act, as it did with a proposed ban on partial-birth abortion, our Congress has twice demonstrated integrity. Can the same be said about a court that deems the saving of human life to be “gangsterism” and then rules that disbursement of pornography into our homes is legal?

RICHARD G. BROADIE

Palm Springs