|
''Urofsky v. Gilmore'', 216 F.3d 401 (4th Cir. 2000), is a case decided before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit which concerned the matter of professors challenging constitutionality of Virginia law restricting access to sexually explicit material on work computers. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) joined the professors in the case against the state of Virginia. A three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit overturned an earlier ruling by the District Court, and upheld the Virginia law. The ACLU then requested an en banc hearing of the entire Fourth Circuit, which determined that university instructors do not have a right guaranteed by the United States Constitution to view sexually explicit material on facility computers. The ACLU then appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, and the ruling by the Fourth Circuit remained in effect. == Background == Six university instructors in Virginia sued contesting a state regulation which prohibited them as state employees from viewing sexually explicit material on work computers.〔 The six professors' research included an academic study of Internet pornography.〔 Professor Melvin Urofsky of Virginia Commonwealth University was the lead plaintiff. They asserted that this prohibition violated their rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.〔〔 The legislation challenged was originally passed by the Virginia General Assembly in 1996, and then later amended in 1999. The six college instructors argued that the legislation resulted in chilled speech leading to a limited role and decreased capacity for them to teach and perform academic research.〔 The university professors were joined in their case against the state by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The academic specialties of the professors included poet Algernon Charles Swinburne, and the subject of human sexuality.〔 One of the plaintiffs was a professor who focused her research in queer studies, women's studies, and gender studies. She told ''The Virginian-Pilot'' that she was not sure whether she was able to study the topic of human sexuality online due to the Virginia law.〔 Another professor in the case said he chose not to give his class an assignment studying indecency law on the Internet due to his concern he could not confirm their research online.〔 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Urofsky v. Gilmore」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|