Summary

Project 2025, a manifesto supported by the conservative Heritage Foundation, calls for a ban on pornography, labeling its purveyors as criminals and advocating for strict penalties, including jail time for producers and registered sex offender status for educators distributing it.

The manifesto argues that porn lacks First Amendment protection, framing it as harmful and exploitative.

With a right-leaning Supreme Court, proponents aim to overturn existing protections established in Miller v. California, potentially impacting mainstream media.

Donald Trump has pledged to bring Project 2025 contributors onto his team.

  • _bcron_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Everyone has a porn-producing camera in their pocket.

    One corollary is that it’d probably make a little easier for law enforcement/government agencies to subpoena ISPs or snoop around in phones looking for things that aren’t porn. Realistically probably won’t happen but I bet this is a cop’s wet dream similar to ‘distinct smell of marijuana’. Plausible deniability is big brother’s best friend

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 minutes ago

      Again, at the risk of repeating myself: they will not need subpoenas dude. That’s not how fascism works. The corporations will become an arm of the government, to be used at the whim of its sole leader, or they will be eliminated.

      This has happened before.

      People are still talking as if things will just continue as normal, and there will be rule of law that is in any way fair. Please wake up, people.

    • henfredemars@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Indeed. This is the breakdown of individual rights people were referring to.

      I’m sure it will start with some sort of “think of the children.”

      • _bcron_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Yup, hypothetically like the Patriot act. Blow smoke up everyone’s ass saying they only use it within its scope (a rather virtuous scope such as ‘preventing sexual exploitation’), the majority with their suspension of disbelief chanting that mantra ‘if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear’. If you go so far as to point out how it could hypothetically be misused you’re met with everything from ‘take the tinfoil hat off’ to ‘which side are you on’. Or worse.

        But then years later everyone finds out that it was misused so much that even those misusing it can’t determine the extent to which it was misused. Just a bunch of case studies of criminal charges in which it was found to have been misused