The PROTECT Act, which was signed into law by George W Bush in 2003, includes prohibitions against illustrations depicting child pornography, including computer-generated illustrations, also known as virtual child pornography. This is distinctly different from the previous Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 which had been struck down by the Supreme Court in 2002 as unconstitutional.
You can read the particulars of the law here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003), but note the phrase that reads: "Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition."
Note further that there has already been one conviction through this law: "The first conviction of a person found to have violated the sections of the act relating to virtual child pornography, Dwight Whorley of Virginia, was upheld in a 2-1 panel decision of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in December 2008.[12] This was in apparent contradiction to a previous U.S. Supreme Court ruling that stated virtual child pornography was protected free speech." That last line indicates that the matter and the issue haven't yet had their final day in the courts, but until it does go back to the Supreme Court, it remains the law in effect.
I have done my research.
The PROTECT Act, which was signed into law by George W Bush in 2003, includes prohibitions against illustrations depicting child pornography, including computer-generated illustrations, also known as virtual child pornography. This is distinctly different from the previous Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 which had been struck down by the Supreme Court in 2002 as unconstitutional.
You can read the particulars of the law here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003), but note the phrase that reads: "Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition."
Note further that there has already been one conviction through this law: "The first conviction of a person found to have violated the sections of the act relating to virtual child pornography, Dwight Whorley of Virginia, was upheld in a 2-1 panel decision of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in December 2008.[12] This was in apparent contradiction to a previous U.S. Supreme Court ruling that stated virtual child pornography was protected free speech." That last line indicates that the matter and the issue haven't yet had their final day in the courts, but until it does go back to the Supreme Court, it remains the law in effect.