https://i.gyazo.com/5ef064e0bb1df2b5043a35019ce2c3fb.gif

Get ready for Traci Lords 2.0 ...shame.

“Judge Michael Baylson of the U.S. 3rd Circuit of Appeals ruled that most of 2257’s record keeping requirements were unconstitutional on First and Fourth Amendment grounds. The ruling allows primary producers to fulfill age verification obligations by using a form developed by the Free Speech Coalition, the industry association that brought the lawsuit against 2257. In the most far-reaching and troublesome change, the decision completely exempts major distributors (termed secondary producers), from any record-keeping requirements.”

Well of course it was going to run into a 1st Amendment and 4th Amendment violation. That’s the problem with a Congress. They enacted these laws in the wake of the Traci Lords scandal in the 1980’s http://biletskylaw.com/2257-regulations/ And that’s where 2257 comes from. It was a knee jerk we need to save the children regulation and of course Congress doesn’t give a shit about the Constitution which is why the law was written poorly enough for it to fail on those grounds. The 2257 requirements are burdensome by design. They could’ve written the law differently to make it effective while not running into 1A and 4A issues but like I said it’s Congress.

Btw of course there’s no way for these Tube sites owned by MindGeek to keep 2257’s on every person that uploads content on their site. There’s literally millions of people fucking and uploading video of themselves onto these sites.

That being said MindGeek is very much looking like (((they))) wanted to basically become the megacorp of porn worldwide.

I just don’t know how they’re going to move forward from here. In theory the law can be rewritten before this winds up at the Supreme Court however given Congress’ ability to pass fuck all even when R’a Control the House Senate and White House (lots of backstabbing Never Trumpers to thank for this) I think we’ll have to wait until after the military tribunals after this November. At that point a full recording of government from the top down is likely to happen and the whole world is going to change.

Did anyone catch this line? "Underage performer" seems to imply that the children are not being exploited. Like they are just fulfilling their childhood dream or something ffs. Here is the quote:

"We believe it could lead to a sharp increase in the number of underage performers being exploited due to the removal of legal oversight and penalties for uploading or distributing images that feature minors."

Does it not sound like the intention is to cause more children to be exploited? What the fuck is an "underaged performer" in this fucking context??

This makes me so so angry

Most of the online porn doesn't follow the rule of keeping track of the ages of performers. There should be contact information for this keeper of records. So most online porn is illegal in the US on the face of it.

In 1988 he was appointed by President Ronald Reagan as the United States Attorney for the Eastern District, a position he held until 1993.[2] He returned to private practice as a partner with Duane Morris until 2002,[3] when he was nominated on January 23 by President George W. Bush to a seat on the Eastern District Court that had been vacated by Robert F. Kelly.[3] He was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on April 30, 2002, and received his commission on June 19.[2] He assumed senior status on July 13, 2012.

Reagan and Bush appointee - Conservative. Go figure. He also did this.

U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson issued a 128-page ruling, stating a $1.5 million Department of Justice law enforcement grant can't be withheld from Philadelphia because the city refuses to fully cooperate with federal agents to identify and arrest people who immigrated without appropriate documents.

I find this really odd. Seems like Baylson has switched sides or he is on the take to whomever. OR he is in with the cabal all the way.

Like we expected the child pornograpy producers to keep records anyway...

(((Judge Michael Baylson))) https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/jbaylson/jbaylson.jpg

Here is the archive: http://archive.fo/1xUIQ

Gail Dines, author, has been fighting the porn industry for years. Look up her videos on YouTube. If you've ever supported porn or thought it was OK, she will change your mind.

The same Judge Baylson cited the strength of our research in his 2013 ruling to uphold the 2257 regulations. But in his decision this August, for reasons unknown to us, he appears to have changed his mind and sided with the industry over the protection of children.

Gee...that's not fishy at all.

Thanks for posting this @bdmthrfkr .

The judicial system is so deep into the depravity it's frightening.

We should never call it child porn. It is child abuse. It is not a part of the porn industry.

Child pornography may make a comeback after court ruling guts regulations protecting minors That is what it says. IMO, this is in retaliation to the grand jury's report on the RCC pedophile priests. @Cc1914 @Gilderoy

What do you mean legal ? Can you please elaborate on this article ?