Notice: My personal stance on AI generated artwork. Retweet and share if you agree. Let us discuss, and not immediately scream bloody murder.

Now Viewing: Legality of teenaged hentai in the USA
Keep it civil, do not flame or bait other users. If you notice anything illegal or inappropriate being discussed, contact an administrator or moderator.

MidbossVyers - Group: Member - Total Posts: 365
user_avatar
Posted on: 01/20/19 07:52AM

lozertuser said:
This is no different than the loli thread we had. All states technically allow it, as the US Supreme Court ruled it legal, but some may have laws that don't allow it. Those are the states you will have to fight and take back to the State's Supreme Court, which is costly, and will end the debate in that state about the legality of such content.

Link to the federal law, please?



jedi1357 - Group: Moderator - Total Posts: 5747
user_avatar
Posted on: 01/20/19 11:38AM

MidbossVyers said:
lozertuser said:
This is no different than the loli thread we had. All states technically allow it, as the US Supreme Court ruled it legal, but some may have laws that don't allow it. Those are the states you will have to fight and take back to the State's Supreme Court, which is costly, and will end the debate in that state about the legality of such content.

Link to the federal law, please?


Someone linked it earlier. If you read through it you will find it had an expiration date requiring it to be renewed. This was never done. Currently there is no federal law regarding drawn porn. In accordance with the 10th amendment, each state may make such laws as they wish. I'm not currently aware of any such laws.

Even real child porn was legal (with caveats) until the 1970s. Sex between minors and adults was outlawed in the 1930s for prostitution tax evasion reasons so new CP made in the US could only be solo or child-on-child but the distribution other CP was still allowed. Miller v. California in 1973 made it so "obscene" pornography was no longer protected by the first amendment. New York v. Ferber of 1983 made it so CP not covered earlier would still not be protected by the 1st amendment. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002) made non-real porn (and real but non-sexual nudity of minors) exempt from the previous ruling. The PROTECT Act of 2003 tried to bring it back but a judge struck it down as "how is a cartoon character a person?". The law discussed earlier was a multinational treaty signed by the US in 2004 that banned the distribution of CP content (including drawings/renaissance paintings and other over-reaching aspects of art) for two years but the law-makers let it expire because it was too broad and encroached the 1st amendment.

The PROTECT Act Originally made it so the creation or distribution of CP was "exploitation of a minor" and classed as a violent crime under USC 18 Code 25. It technically still is but the particulars of prosecution fall under USC18 Section 2251 of 1978 and amended numerous times with the latest version being 2008. Here CP is defined as:

(8)“child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where— (A)the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (B)such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (C)such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.



MidbossVyers - Group: Member - Total Posts: 365
user_avatar
Posted on: 01/20/19 03:24PM

So basically, it's only illegal when it can be passed off as the real thing?



jedi1357 - Group: Moderator - Total Posts: 5747
user_avatar
Posted on: 01/20/19 03:49PM

MidbossVyers said:
So basically, it's only illegal when it can be passed off as the real thing?


Correct. That is also why photo-realistic loli/shota is not allowed on Gelbooru.



MidbossVyers - Group: Member - Total Posts: 365
user_avatar
Posted on: 02/25/19 06:22PM




jedi1357 - Group: Moderator - Total Posts: 5747
user_avatar
Posted on: 02/25/19 06:47PM



That is an old link from 2003. It has since been superseded by 18 U.S.C. § 2252a(c). which states "It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge [if] the alleged child pornography was not produced using any actual minor or minors."

A drawing or cartoon that uses a real minor as a model or is traced therefrom will still be illegal but the depiction of a fictional character is fine as long as it is not photo-realistic.



MidbossVyers - Group: Member - Total Posts: 365
user_avatar
Posted on: 02/25/19 08:03PM

According to mct1 of www.reddit.com/r/GGinSF/c...content_japanese/#ehae5nh
"18 USC 2252a(c) was added per Public Law 104-208 in 1996 (and subsequently amended). It does not supercede 18 USC 1466A. Feel free to browse the cited public laws at those two house.gov addresses and see if you can find a bill that strikes 1466A in favor of 2252A. You won't find one.

Furthermore, the affirmative defense you speak of is from 2252A(c) which refers to a charge brought under 2252A (i.e. receipt, transport, reproduction, promotion or sale of child pornography)... NOT a charge brought under 1466A (regarding obscene visual depictions of minors). Indeed, pursuant to 18 USC 1466A(c):

Nonrequired Element of Offense.-It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist."



DarthDaniel96 - Group: Member - Total Posts: 256
user_avatar
Posted on: 02/26/19 08:53AM

my respects and I do not indicate if I like loli hentai^^

but in europe there is more erotic and hentai and in the USA there is also hentai but she denies that I am a friend of europeans to his.



Ecchi-Addict - Group: Member - Total Posts: 21
user_avatar
Posted on: 02/26/19 09:04AM

LagDragon said:
Ecchi-Addict said:
I have a feeling liberal states give them a pass while many conservative states wont, but I cant be too sure.


You may want to actually compare that kind of assumption to reality... That's actually a really ignorant thing to say.


I mean based on my research this is the case. Cali allows it but Texas doesn't.



jedi1357 - Group: Moderator - Total Posts: 5747
user_avatar
Posted on: 02/26/19 11:10AM

Ecchi-Addict said:

I mean based on my research this is the case. Cali allows it but Texas doesn't.


The 10th amendment (US Constitution) allows state laws to be more strict than federal laws if they want to be.



add_replyAdd Reply


1 2 3