•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This article addressed the constitutionality of the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1995 (Hatch Bill) in regard to computer-generated child pornography. The Bill outlaws a visual depiction that is or appears to be of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct. The author claims the comments of David B. Johnson and John C. Scheller regarding the constitutionality of the Bill are analytically flawed because they focus on dicta from New York v. Ferber and Osborne v. Ohio. The author then engages in his own assessment of the Bill using a First Amendment approach and suggests what findings Congress should make to ensure the Bill is found to be constitutional judicial scrutiny.