appeals court delivers unsettling ruling and says - /news/

Anonymous08/29/26, 18:04No.1532997Appeals court delivers unsettling ruling — and says Supreme Court left it no choice

>The Seventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of a possession charge against a Wisconsin man with hundreds of AI-generated images https://www.foxnews.com/politics/appeals-court-delivers-unsettling-ruling-supreme-court-left-no-choice >A federal appeals court says decades-old Supreme Court precedent forced it to protect the in-home possession of AI-generated child sexual abuse material, as judges warned that rapidly advancing technology has complicated legal lines drawn nearly 25 years ago. >The ruling exposes a widening gap between Supreme Court precedent and rapidly advancing artificial intelligence. The Seventh Circuit said it was bound by a 2002 Supreme Court decision that rejected restrictions on sexually explicit depictions of fictional children when no actual child was involved in their creation. But two judges warned that modern AI can now generate images virtually indistinguishable from material depicting the abuse of real children. >"Indeed, in Free Speech Coalition, the Supreme Court addressed the scope of First Amendment protections for virtual CSAM, but that was nearly twenty-five years ago, and the image-generation technology available today was likely unimaginable back then," Judge John Lee wrote. "Given the relentless advancement in artificial intelligence models, we have some concerns about the lines these cases draw, but we are not free to redraw them ourselves." >The Seventh Circuit affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of one of four charges against Steven Anderegg, who investigators said had hundreds of AI-generated sexually explicit images depicting children on devices seized from his Wisconsin home. >Anderegg was charged with producing and distributing the AI-generated material, transferring it to a minor under 16, and possessing it. A federal district court dismissed only the possession charge on First Amendment grounds, leaving the other three charges intact.

Replies

Anon08/29/26, 18:05No.1532998

>The Justice Department appealed that dismissal, arguing that the government should be permitted to prohibit possession of obscene virtual child sexual abuse material even when no actual child was involved in its creation. But the Seventh Circuit sided with the lower court.>The government generally cannot criminalize the private possession of obscene material inside someone's home, but it can prohibit possession of child sexual abuse material involving real children because its creation exploits actual victims.>However, the Supreme Court complicated that distinction in 2002 when it struck down restrictions covering sexually explicit images of fictional children created without using actual minors. The justices reasoned that the government's overriding interest in protecting children from exploitation did not apply in the same way when no real child was involved.>Hans von Spakovsky, a senior fellow with Advancing American Freedom, told Fox News Digital that the appeals court "had no choice but to uphold the dismissal under the First Amendment" because of the Supreme Court's ruling.>But von Spakovsky agreed with the concurrence by Lee and Judge Joshua Kolar, who warned the Supreme Court that the rapid growth of AI technology could require the justices to revisit precedent.>"Unforunately, AI-generated images are now virtualy indistinguishable from the real thing and some of these images be created based on real child sexual abuse material," von Spavosky said. "Technology may have overtaken and overwhelmed the reasoning used in those prior decisions.">The Supreme Court previously ruled in Free Speech Coalition that taking images of real children and "morphing" them into sexually explicit poses would not be protected under its ruling on the possession of child sexual abuse material depicting fictional children because the practice involves the interests of real children.

Anon08/29/26, 18:06No.1533000

>Justice Department lawyers have warned that the rise of AI-generated child sexual abuse material could bog down investigators trying to identify real victims, as increasingly realistic artificial images become harder to distinguish from depictions of actual abuse.>Judges Lee and Kolar raised another concern in their concurrence, citing research that found hundreds of child sexual abuse material images in a major dataset used to train image-generating AI. The judges suggested that could create a link between AI-generated material and the exploitation of real children, though they stressed that the government did not raise the issue in this case and that the record was insufficient to resolve it.>Justice Clarence Thomas anticipated the dilemma more than two decades ago, warning in the Supreme Court’s 2002 ruling that advancing technology could eventually make virtual depictions indistinguishable from child sexual abuse material involving real victims.>"If technological advances thwart prosecution of ‘unlawful speech,’ the Government may well have a compelling interest in barring or otherwise regulating some narrow category of ‘lawful speech’" to enforce laws against material produced through the abuse of real children, Thomas wrote.

Anon08/29/26, 18:08No.1533001

Looks like there's going to be a huge crackdown coming soon. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft adds some AIshit to Windows which checks for CP.

Anon08/31/26, 02:14No.1533166

Democrats literally telling the Supreme Court that it's okay to be a pedophiles

Anon08/31/26, 03:08No.1533177

esl shill waived his self respect by having such a humiliating job

Anon08/31/26, 03:13No.1533182

esl shill is begging for attention again. i already made fun of him for his spelling error, what more does he want

Anon08/31/26, 03:22No.1533190

replying to what

Anon08/31/26, 04:05No.1533234

esl shill is now trying to claim that romeo and juliet laws are worse than red states where it's legal to marry children. can't make this up

Anon08/31/26, 04:13No.1533248

esl shill is projecting again

Anon08/31/26, 04:26No.1533264

esl shill tantrum aside, the files remain unreleased

Anon08/31/26, 10:33No.1533314

Meanwhile https://www.cps.gov.uk/national-news/news/cps-decides-prosecute-tate-brothers-additional-sexual-offences >The CPS has decided to prosecute Andrew Tate, 39, with seven further counts of rape, three counts of arranging or facilitating trafficking for sexual exploitation, three counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and 19 additional charges for offences relating to indecent images of a child and extreme pornography >indecent images of a child UK's legal system & lawmakers in Parliament thought ahead >2009 Coroners and Justice Act: possession of non-photographic images of children that are pedophilic in nature are extremely illegal >Gary Glitter had pedophilic photos of children on his hard drive decades ago: UK's legal system ensured he will die in prison >indecent images of a child That's why the Tate-rs are cooked.

Anon08/31/26, 10:38No.1533315

1533312 >Briben the child gang paper >Briben So someone completely different with the name 'Briben' was a child rapist and not Biden. Thanks for admitting that. Also >paper >inb4 "grammar nazi", "context" etc So Biden is even more innocent when your own words - certainly incorrect use of such compared to the right ones on paper in a dictionary - rapes your credibility, 1533312 the esl shill.

Anon09/01/26, 16:09No.1533430

1533315 >esl shill Every accusation is a confession

Anon09/02/26, 10:50No.1533593

Joe Briben gang fucks little kids.

Anon09/04/26, 14:43No.1533989

1533868 >UK's 2009 Coroners and Justice Act: possession of so much as artwork of a pedophilic nature is just as illegal as actual photographs of RL CP. Doesn't matter if it's drawn, 3D rendered or AI (de)generated >UK's police have the power to check computer drives - without a warrant - for scanned/downloaded photos, drawings and rendered/(de)generated images. >Scotland Yard in London have backup by the government's GCHQ, which scans monitors & intercepts the entire telecommunications network, and detects CP and those who upload/download such, even on the Dark Web, and any encryption they've already cracked >Oh, and if your drives are encrypted, as far as they're concerned, you're immediately guilty of posessing such extremely illegal images.. And the courts will see things the police's way rather than yours Why shouldn't any & all other countries follow their example? If you think your opinions to the contrary are superior, you can always go through the entry gates at the Palace of Westminster in London and persuade MPs there that their lawmaking opinions are wrong and the police are wrong too. But good luck in persuading the police at said entry gates otherwise, as they're armed with H&K MP7s. Do you have a license for that wrong opinion?

Anon09/05/26, 03:36No.1534303

>they won't stop the grooming and raping >the Republican party refuse to make child marriages illegal in certain states, thus the GOP: Gang Of Pedophiles. And their leader that refuses to do anything about it Thus rightists don't have the right to have opinions about anyone else, when even worse is allowed to exist in the Republican party, and supporters of the GOP refuse to condemn them. Hypocrisy. It's hardwired into the DNA of rightists. And hypocrites never had the right to have opinions in the first place. Eliminate all wrongdoers, wrongthinkers & deviants among your own kind before you can so much as think of pointing the finger of accusation at anyone else. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Refuse to condemn the grooming Gang Of Pedophiles, you're as bad as they are. Thus you only have the right to STFU in perpetuity.