LSaF

Question

Political

Congress enacted a law penalizing "any person who, through a computer system, transmits content that is grossly offensive, indecent, or morally reprehensible." Aldrin, a political blogger, was charged under the law after posting an online satirical essay comparing a government official's policy decisions to the conduct of a fictional incompetent bureaucrat. Aldrin challenged the law as unconstitutional for being void for vagueness. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) opposed the challenge, arguing that terms like "grossly offensive" and "morally reprehensible" are common English phrases that any reasonable person can understand, and that the law is sufficiently definite. Is the law void for vagueness? (Bar 2026 Syllabus)

0/1500
7:00
Skip