California
California Pornography Laws (2026): Legal Status, Age Verification, and Penalties
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 20, 2026). · 6 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Pornography is legal for California adults to view, possess, and buy. State obscenity law targets distribution, exhibition, and intent to distribute, not private consumption, and California has no age-verification law forcing adult websites to check a visitor's ID before granting access. The state's real regulatory activity in this space concentrates on child sexual abuse material, nonconsensual intimate images, and, starting in 2027, a device-level age signal that is easy to mistake for a porn-site gate.
Is Pornography Legal in California?
Yes. Adults in California may legally view, possess, and purchase pornographic material in private. California's obscenity statute, Cal. Penal Code § 311.2, is built around distribution and exhibition, not private consumption. Subsection (a) criminalizes knowingly sending or bringing obscene matter into the state for sale or distribution, or possessing, preparing, publishing, producing, or printing it with intent to distribute or exhibit it. A person who simply owns obscene material, without the intent to distribute or exhibit it commercially, is not covered by that subsection. A first offense under subsection (a) is a misdemeanor. A repeat conviction does more than raise the fine: under Cal. Penal Code § 311.9(a), a violation of § 311.2(a) by a person previously convicted of any offense in the obscenity chapter or of a violation of § 313.1 is punishable as a felony under Penal Code § 1170(h). Section 311.2(a) separately allows the court to add a fine of up to $50,000 where the person has a prior conviction under that section.
Separate subsections of the same statute, (b) through (d), address material depicting minors, which California treats as a categorically different and far more serious offense regardless of any obscenity finding. Those provisions are discussed below under CSAM.
California Has No Adult-Content Age-Verification Law
As of this writing, California does not require pornographic websites to verify a visitor's age before granting access. A bill that would have created such a requirement, AB 3080 ("The Parent's Accountability and Child Protection Act," 2023-24 session), passed the Assembly 65-0, but the Senate Judiciary Committee stripped the age-verification requirement, and the remaining, watered-down bill died in Senate Appropriations on November 30, 2024, without a floor vote.

This is a common point of confusion because of a separate law that sounds similar. AB 1043, the Digital Age Assurance Act, was signed October 13, 2025, and becomes operative January 1, 2027. It is a device-level requirement: it obligates operating system providers to collect a user's birth date at device setup and expose an age-bracket signal (under 13, 13 to 16, 16 to 18, or 18 and older) that apps can read, with the signal treated as the primary age indicator. AB 1043 does not require any website, including a pornography site, to check ID before letting a visitor in, and it does not take effect until 2027. Violations are civil, enforced by the California Attorney General, with penalties up to $2,500 per affected child for a negligent violation and $7,500 per affected child for an intentional one.
Because California has no adult-content-specific age-verification mandate, mainstream adult platforms do not geo-block California visitors the way they geo-block some other states with an enacted gate.
One California statute does reach adult material that lands in a minor's hands, though it is not a website age gate. Cal. Penal Code § 313.1(a) makes it a crime to knowingly sell, rent, distribute, send, or exhibit harmful matter to a minor by any means, either with knowledge that the person is a minor or while failing to exercise reasonable care in ascertaining a minor's true age. Section 313.4 punishes that by up to a year in county jail, a fine of up to $2,000, or both, and a prior conviction under § 313.1 or the obscenity chapter pushes the sentence to imprisonment under § 1170(h). It imposes no duty to check every visitor's age, but a distributor who knows or should know the recipient is a minor is exposed under it.
CSAM and Minors
California's approach to child sexual abuse material is significantly harsher than its adult obscenity law, and applies regardless of whether the underlying image would independently qualify as obscene.
Possession and Distribution
Cal. Penal Code § 311.11 makes it a crime to knowingly possess or control matter depicting a person under 18 engaged in sexual conduct. The statute was amended to reach material containing digitally altered or AI-generated data depicting an apparent minor in sexual conduct; for that category, the prosecution does not need to separately prove the material is obscene. A first offense carries a sentence of state prison time, up to a year in county jail, or a fine of up to $2,500, or a combination. The offense escalates significantly for aggravated cases, defined in § 311.11(c) as matter containing more than 600 images that violate subdivision (a) together with 10 or more images involving a prepubescent minor or a minor under 12 years of age, or matter depicting sadism or masochism, and again for a defendant with a prior qualifying conviction.
Distribution or possession with intent to distribute CSAM is covered separately under § 311.2(b), a felony punishable by two, three, or six years in state prison, or a fine of up to $100,000.
Minors and Their Own Images
For how California law treats minors who send or receive explicit images of themselves or each other, including how that differs from the adult CSAM framework above, see California Sexting Laws.
Nonconsensual Intimate Images (Revenge Porn)
California addresses nonconsensual distribution of intimate images through Cal. Penal Code § 647(j)(4), part of the state's disorderly conduct statute. The law applies when a person intentionally distributes an identifiable intimate image, knowing or having reason to know that the distribution will cause serious emotional distress, and the depicted person actually suffers that distress. The image must also fall into one of several categories: it was created or distributed under an agreement that it would remain private, it was obtained without the depicted person's authorization under circumstances where a reasonable expectation of privacy existed, or it was obtained by exceeding authorized access to an account or device. A first violation involving an adult victim is an ordinary misdemeanor under the opening clause of § 647, so Cal. Penal Code § 19 supplies the penalty: up to six months in county jail, a fine of up to $1,000, or both. Section 647(k) raises the ceiling to a year in county jail, a fine of up to $2,000, or both, for a second or subsequent violation of subdivision (j) or where the victim was a minor at the time of the offense.
The same statute expressly reaches deepfake images, computer-generated depictions made to appear authentic, with an exception carved out for a minor offender. Statutory exceptions exist for reporting unlawful activity, complying with a court order, participating in a lawful public proceeding, or images that are a matter of genuine public concern rather than merely involving a public figure.
For the federal Take It Down Act, which requires covered platforms to remove a valid nonconsensual intimate-image report within 48 hours regardless of state law, see Revenge Porn Laws by State.
Public Display and Indecent Exposure
California's indecent exposure statute, Cal. Penal Code § 314, criminalizes willfully and lewdly exposing one's person or private parts in a public place, or anywhere others present may be offended or annoyed, and separately covers procuring or counseling an indecent exhibition. A first offense is a misdemeanor. An exposure under subdivision 1 committed after entering an inhabited dwelling house, a trailer coach, or the inhabited portion of another building without consent is punishable by imprisonment in state prison or in county jail for up to a year, which leaves it chargeable as either a felony or a misdemeanor. The statute reserves the word felony for a second or subsequent conviction under subdivision 1, or a first conviction under subdivision 1 by a person with a previous conviction under Penal Code § 288 (lewd acts with a child).

Penalties at a Glance
| Offense | Statute | Classification |
|---|---|---|
| Obscenity distribution, adult (1st offense) | Cal. Penal Code 311.2(a) | Misdemeanor; felony under 311.9(a) with a prior chapter conviction, plus an added fine up to $50,000 |
| CSAM distribution / possession with intent | Cal. Penal Code 311.2(b) | Felony, 2, 3, or 6 years, or fine up to $100,000 |
| CSAM possession | Cal. Penal Code 311.11 | Felony; up to 6 years with a prior conviction |
| Nonconsensual intimate image distribution | Cal. Penal Code 647(j)(4) | Misdemeanor; up to 6 months and/or $1,000 (1 year and/or $2,000 on a repeat or minor victim, 647(k)) |
| Indecent exposure, 1st offense | Cal. Penal Code 314 | Misdemeanor |
| Indecent exposure, after unlawful entry or repeat | Cal. Penal Code 314 | Prison or county jail after unlawful entry; felony on a 2nd conviction under subdivision 1 |
Practical Considerations
State obscenity and CSAM law are not the only source of exposure in this area. Federal 18 U.S.C. § 2257 record-keeping requirements for producers of sexually explicit content are a federal obligation that exists independently of anything in the California Penal Code, and federal CSAM statutes carry their own penalties regardless of the outcome of any state charge. AB 1043's device-age-signal requirement, once operative in 2027, will apply broadly to apps, not just adult content, and is a separate compliance question from anything discussed above. Workplace and device policies can also restrict access to pornography on employer-owned equipment even where no state law applies, which is a private employment matter rather than a criminal one. Anyone facing a charge under these statutes should consult an attorney for advice specific to their situation.
More California Laws
- California Age Verification Law
- California Sexting Laws
- California Deepfake Laws
- California Expungement Laws

Frequently Asked Questions
Is pornography legal in California?
Yes. Private adult possession and viewing of obscene, non-CSAM material is legal. Cal. Penal Code 311.2(a) targets distributing or possessing obscene material with intent to distribute or exhibit it, not private viewing by an adult.
Does California require age verification to access porn sites?
No, not as of this writing. A 2023-24 bill that would have created a pornography-specific age-verification requirement (AB 3080) had that requirement stripped and died without passing. California's separate AB 1043 is a device-level age-signal law, not a porn-site ID check, and does not take effect until January 1, 2027.
What is AB 1043 and does it apply to adult websites?
AB 1043, the Digital Age Assurance Act, requires device operating systems to collect a birth date at setup and share an age-bracket signal with apps, starting January 1, 2027. It regulates devices and app developers generally, not adult content specifically, and does not require a pornography site to verify ID before granting access.
What is the penalty for possessing child sexual abuse material in California?
A first offense under Cal. Penal Code 311.11 carries state prison time, up to a year in county jail, or a fine of up to $2,500. Penalties rise significantly for aggravated cases involving a large volume of images or a prior conviction.
Is sharing a nude photo of someone without their consent a crime in California?
Yes. Cal. Penal Code 647(j)(4) makes it a misdemeanor to intentionally distribute an identifiable intimate image, including an AI-generated deepfake, when the distributor knows or should know it will cause serious emotional distress and the person suffers that distress.
Can I be charged with a crime for public indecent exposure in California?
Yes. Cal. Penal Code 314 makes indecent exposure a misdemeanor for a first offense. An exposure committed after unlawfully entering a home is punishable by state prison or by up to a year in county jail, so it can be charged as either a felony or a misdemeanor. The offense is a felony on a second or subsequent conviction under subdivision 1 of that section, or on a first conviction under subdivision 1 by a person with a previous conviction under Penal Code 288 for a lewd act with a child.
Is 18 U.S.C. 2257 record-keeping a California law?
No. Record-keeping requirements for producers of sexually explicit content under 18 U.S.C. 2257 are federal, not a California statute. They apply regardless of anything in the California Penal Code.
Updates
Corrected the penalties for a first-offense nonconsensual intimate image violation, for a repeat obscenity-distribution conviction and for indecent exposure after an unlawful entry, fixed the aggravated child sexual abuse material image threshold, and added the state law on distributing harmful matter to a minor.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
California Penal Code
§ 311.2In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) Every person who knowingly sends or causes to be sent, or brings or causes to be brought, into this state for sale or distribution, or in this state possesses, prepares, publishes, produces, or prints, with intent to distribute or to exhibit to others, or who offers to distribute, distributes, or exhibits to others, any obscene matter is for a first offense, guilty of a misdemeanor. If the person has previously been convicted of any violation of this section, the court may, in addition to the punishment authorized in Section 311.9, impose a fine not exceeding fifty thousand dollars ($50,000).
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
Cited in 91 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Zeitlin v. Arnebergh (California Supreme Court 1963, 59 Cal. 2d 901)“…ion 311, 2 and that its sale would not violate Penal Code section 311.2. 3 Plaintiffs appended to…”
- Perrine v. Municipal Court (California Supreme Court 1971, 5 Cal. 3d 656)“…time petitioner admitted a 1968 conviction for violation of Penal Code section 311.2 (selling, distributing, or exhibiting o…”
- Bloom v. Municipal Court (California Supreme Court 1976, 16 Cal. 3d 71)“…ity today attempt to save the California obscenity statute (Pen. Code, § 311.2) through incorporating by reference the…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: California Sexting Laws: Legal Consequences and Penalties
§ 311.11In forcecited in 3 of our articles
(a) (1) Every person who knowingly possesses or controls any matter, representation of information, data, or image, including, but not limited to, any film, filmstrip, photograph, negative, slide, photocopy, videotape, video laser disc, computer hardware, computer software, computer floppy disc, data storage media, CD-ROM, or computer-generated equipment or any other computer-generated image that contains or incorporates in any manner, any film, filmstrip, or any digitally altered or artificial-intelligence-generated matter, the production of which involves the use of a person under 18 years of age, knowing that the matter depicts a person under 18 years of age personally engaging in or simulating sexual conduct, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 311.4, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, or a county jail for up to one year, or by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by both the fine and imprisonment.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
Cited in 167 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Tecklenburg v. Appellate Division (2009) read Penal Code 311.11(a) to cover an image displayed on a computer screen, so cache files plus proof the defendant sought and viewed them supported conviction. People v. Gonzalez (2012) held mandatory registration for a 311.11 conviction, but not statutory rape, does not deny equal protection.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- People v. Holford (California Court of Appeal 2012, 203 Cal. App. 4th 155)✓A parole search of Holford's room turned up a hard drive holding one child pornography video among 46,000 files; the court found no abuse of discretion in playing all 25 minutes for the jury, since his offered stipulation did not cover section 311.11's knowledge element.
- Tecklenburg v. Appellate Division of Superior Court (California Court of Appeal 2009, 169 Cal. App. 4th 1402)✓Tecklenburg used his home and work computers to seek out child pornography sites, go past their homepages and enlarge images on screen; the court held that conduct was knowing possession or control under section 311.11(a) even without proof he knew of the cache, and affirmed.
- People v. Gonzalez (California Court of Appeal 2012, 211 Cal. App. 4th 132)✓Gonzalez pleaded guilty to possessing at least 40 child pornography images and challenged mandatory sex offender registration; the court held that requiring registration for a section 311.11 conviction but not for statutory rape does not violate equal protection.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: California Age of Consent Laws: Statutes, Penalties and Reporting
§ 647In forcecited in 19 of our articles
Except as provided in paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) and in subdivisions (k) and (l), a person who commits any of the following acts is guilty of disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor: (a) An individual who solicits anyone to engage in or who engages in lewd or dissolute conduct in a public place or in a place open to the public or exposed to public view. (b) (1) An individual who solicits, or who agrees to engage in, or who engages in, an act of prostitution with the intent to receive compensation, money, or anything of value from another person. An individual agrees to engage in an act of prostitution when, with specific intent to so engage, the individual manifests an acceptance of an offer or solicitation by another person to so engage, regardless of whether the offer or solicitation was made by a person who also possessed the specific intent to engage in an act of prostitution. (2) An individual who solicits, or who agrees to engage in, or who engages in, an act of prostitution with another person who is 18 years of age or older in exchange for the individual providing compensation, money, or anything of value to the other person.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
Cited in 593 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):In re Giannini (1968) set aside convictions under Penal Code 647(a) because the prosecution introduced no evidence of community standards, and equated "lewd or dissolute" with obscenity only for the purpose of judging an allegedly obscene dance performed for an audience.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Morrison v. State Board of Education (California Supreme Court 1969, 1 Cal. 3d 214)“…public beach and the teacher was arrested for violation of Penal Code section 647, subdivision (a), and convicted, on his…”
- People v. Laiwa (California Supreme Court 1983, 34 Cal. 3d 711)“…to arrest him for being under the influence of a narcotic. (Pen. Code, § 647, subd. (f).) [1] He moved, however, to…”
- In Re Cregler (California Supreme Court 1961, 56 Cal. 2d 308)✓A man previously convicted of theft was arrested for standing in a San Francisco bus station under the pre-1961 vagrancy version of section 647. The court rejected his vagueness challenge, reading loiter to require lingering to commit a crime, and denied habeas relief.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can an Employer Record Conversations Without Consent? (2026), Is It Illegal to Video Record Someone Without Their Consent? (2026), California Landlord-Tenant Recording and Surveillance Laws (2026)
§ 314In force
Every person who willfully and lewdly, either: 1 Exposes his person, or the private parts thereof, in any public place, or in any place where there are present other persons to be offended or annoyed thereby; or, 2 Procures, counsels, or assists any person so to expose himself or take part in any model artist exhibition, or to make any other exhibition of himself to public view, or the view of any number of persons, such as is offensive to decency, or is adapted to excite to vicious or lewd thoughts or acts, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Every person who violates subdivision 1 of this section after having entered, without consent, an inhabited dwelling house, or trailer coach as defined in Section 635 of the Vehicle Code, or the inhabited portion of any other building, is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison, or in the county jail not exceeding one year. Upon the second and each subsequent conviction under subdivision 1 of this section, or upon a first conviction under subdivision 1 of this section after a previous conviction under Section 288, every person so convicted is guilty of a felony, and is punishable by imprisonment in state prison.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
Cited in 198 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- In Re Lynch (California Supreme Court 1972, 8 Cal. 3d 410)“…ed penalty for second-offense indecent exposure provided by Penal Code section 314 violates the prohibition of the Califor…”
- Lucido v. Superior Court (California Supreme Court 1990, 51 Cal. 3d 335)“…of petitioner Arasimo Settemo Lucido for indecent exposure (Pen. Code, § 314, subd. 1; further statutory references…”
- In Re Giannini (California Supreme Court 1968, 69 Cal. 2d 563)“…r of the nightclub in which she danced, guilty of violating Penal Code section 314, subdivision 1 (wilful and lewd exposur…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 311.9In force
(a) Every person who violates subdivision (a) of Section 311.2 or Section 311.5 is punishable by fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) plus five dollars ($5) for each additional unit of material coming within the provisions of this chapter, which is involved in the offense, not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than six months plus one day for each additional unit of material coming within the provisions of this chapter, and which is involved in the offense, not to exceed a total of 360 days in the county jail, or by both that fine and imprisonment. If that person has previously been convicted of any offense in this chapter, or of a violation of Section 313.1, a violation of subdivision (a) of Section 311.2 or Section 311.5 is punishable as a felony by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170. (b) Every person who violates subdivision (a) of Section 311.4 is punishable by fine of not more than two thousand dollars ($2,000) or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 1973
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- In Re Lynch (California Supreme Court 1972, 8 Cal. 3d 410)“…ears), employ minors to print or distribute obscene matter (Pen. Code, § 311.9. subd. (b); up to 5 years), forge presc…”
- Zeitlin v. Arnebergh (California Supreme Court 1963, 59 Cal. 2d 901)“…ale of obscene matter to adults constitutes a misdemeanor. (Pen. Code, § 311.9.) Thus the defendant ordinarily will be…”
- People v. Burrows (California Court of Appeal 1968, 260 Cal. App. 2d 228)“…nder section 311.4; this makes the second offense a felony (Pen. Code, § 311.9, subd. (b)). The appeal is from a…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 313.1In force
(a) Every person who, with knowledge that a person is a minor, or who fails to exercise reasonable care in ascertaining the true age of a minor, knowingly sells, rents, distributes, sends, causes to be sent, exhibits, or offers to distribute or exhibit by any means, including, but not limited to, live or recorded telephone messages, any harmful matter to the minor shall be punished as specified in Section 313.4. It does not constitute a violation of this section for a telephone corporation, as defined by Section 234 of the Public Utilities Code, to carry or transmit messages described in this chapter or to perform related activities in providing telephone services. (b) Every person who misrepresents himself or herself to be the parent or guardian of a minor and thereby causes the minor to be admitted to an exhibition of any harmful matter shall be punished as specified in Section 313.4.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
Cited in 19 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Berry v. City of Santa Barbara (California Court of Appeal 1995, 40 Cal. App. 4th 1075)“…rt made certain findings: (1) The ordinance is permitted by Penal Code section 313.1, subdivision (d); 2 (2) th…”
- People v. Jensen (California Court of Appeal 2003, 7 Cal. Rptr. 3d 609)“…misdemeanor distribution of harmful matter in violation of Penal Code section 313.1, subdivision (a) (hereafter the misdeme…”
- BRIAN T. v. Pacific Bell (California Court of Appeal 1989, 210 Cal. App. 3d 894)“…instead to request an injunction to restrain violations of Penal Code sections 313.1 and 311.2. We observe that this alterna…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 313.4In force
Every person who violates Section 313.1, other than subdivision (e), is punishable by fine of not more than two thousand dollars ($2,000), by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment. However, if the person has been previously convicted of a violation of Section 313.1, other than subdivision (e), or of any section of Chapter 7.5 (commencing with Section 311) of Title 9 of Part 1 of this code, the person shall be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 1996
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Crawford v. Lungren (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 1996, 96 F.3d 380)“…for as much as one year, or both for the first conviction. Cal.Penal Code § 313.4. Subsequent violations can lead to felo…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
United States Code Title 18
§ 2257Record keeping requirementsIn forcecited in 34 of our articles
Whoever produces any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, digital image, digitally- or computer-manipulated image of an actual human being, picture, or other matter which— contains one or more visual depictions made after November 1, 1990 of actual sexually explicit conduct; and is produced in whole or in part with materials which have been mailed or shipped in interstate or foreign commerce, or is shipped or transported or is intended for shipment or transportation in interstate or foreign commerce; shall create and maintain individually identifiable records pertaining to every performer portrayed in such a visual depiction.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 68 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Connection Distributing Co. v. The Honorable Janet Reno (1998) affirmed denial of a preliminary injunction against section 2257. Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Attorney General of the United States (2012) reviewed it as content neutral under intermediate scrutiny, a standard the Third Circuit later replaced with strict scrutiny.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc. (Supreme Court of the United States 1994, 513 U.S. 64)“…rformers with independent penalties for failure to comply. 18 U. S. C. §§ 2257 (a) and (i) (1988 ed. and Supp. V); Am…”
- Connection Distributing Co. v. The Honorable Janet Reno (Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 1998, 154 F.3d 281)✓A swingers magazine that ran readers' sexually explicit ads challenged section 2257's age record and labeling duties; the court treated the statute as content neutral, found no substantial likelihood of First Amendment success, and affirmed denial of a preliminary injunction.
- Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Attorney General of the United States (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2012, 677 F.3d 519)✓Adult film producers, photographers and sex educators challenged section 2257's recordkeeping duties; the court held the statutes content neutral and found they advance protecting children, but vacated dismissal of the First and Fourth Amendment claims for record development.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: How to File a DMCA Takedown on Xvideos (2026 Guide), West Virginia Voyeurism Laws: Hidden Cameras and Privacy Violations, Illinois Pornography Laws (2026): Legality & No AV Law Yet
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Cal. Penal Code § 311.2: Obscene matter, distribution and CSAM(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov).gov
- Cal. Penal Code § 311.11: Possession of child sexual abuse material(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov).gov
- Cal. Penal Code § 647(j)(4): Disorderly conduct, unauthorized distribution of intimate images(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov).gov
- Cal. Penal Code § 314: Indecent exposure(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov).gov
- AB 1043 (2025): Digital Age Assurance Act, bill text and chaptering status(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov).gov
- AB 3080 (2023-24): bill status showing death in Senate Appropriations(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov).gov
- Cal. Penal Code § 311.9: Punishment for obscenity offenses, including felony exposure on a prior conviction(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov)
- Cal. Penal Code § 313.1: Distributing harmful matter to a minor(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov)
- Cal. Penal Code § 313.4: Punishment for violations of Section 313.1(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov)
- Cal. Penal Code § 19: Default punishment for a misdemeanor(leginfo.legislature.ca.gov)