This is a new example of the escalation in the anti-obscenity fight raging in the United States. Republican Senator Mike Lee relaunched a bill in early May 2025 aimed at making any distribution of pornography liable to federal prosecution. The text, called the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA), hopes to redefine obscenity in the digital age and by focusing on the fantasized protection of minors.
Criminalizing pornography nationwide
The Interstate Obscenity Definition Act, sponsored by Senator Mike Lee (Utah) and Representative Mary Miller (Illinois), aims to establish a new federal definition of obscenity within the framework of the Communications Act of 1934. Concretely, the law aims to replace the Supreme Court's Miller Test (also known as the three-part obscenity test), in effect since 1973. The latter, based on the content's value, its apparent lewdness, and its intentionally offensive nature according to community standards, determines whether a work can be classified as obscene, and therefore excluded from the protection of the First Amendment of the American Constitution.
The stated ambition is clear: to enable the prosecution of creators, distributors, and hosts of pornographic content, by removing the legal ambiguities that, according to its proponents, have allowed the porn industry to thrive online despite the constitutional ban on obscenity. From now on, all content would be considered obscene – and therefore illegal at the federal level – that:
- “taken as a whole, appeals to an interest in nudity, sex, or excretion”
- “depicts or describes actual or simulated sexual acts with the intent to excite or gratify sexual desire”
- “taken as a whole, is devoid of serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific merit”
The notion of community standards or intent to harm is removed, making the definition much broader and uniform across the country. Concretely, the dissemination, sharing, or even possession of pornographic content could fall under federal law, regardless of local laws or the sender's intention.
Towards the criminalization of pornography, but not only
The scope of the text is significant: it would open the way to criminal prosecutions against pornographic sites, but also potentially against cultural works containing scenes of explicit sexuality, or even against individuals disseminating or sharing such content. Several digital freedom associations denounce a definition so broad that it could encompass popular series like Game of Thrones, as well as works of an erotic nature, which would not withstand strict constitutional scrutiny.
Furthermore, the removal of the requirement of malicious intent in electronic communications (telephone, messaging) would criminalize any exchange of content deemed obscene, even without the intention of abuse or harassment. Electronic sexually explicit exchanges and nudes could thus be targeted.
This project is part of a tense political climate, where the issue of online pornography has become a strong ideological marker, particularly under the impetus of the conservative program Project 2025 which advocates the total eradication of X-rated content on the internet. Mike Lee is not new to this: he had already tried to pass similar texts in 2022 and 2024, without success. The radicalization of the debate on child protection and the rise of anti-pornography discourse give this new attempt a particular resonance. Let us recall that Sweden is also considering banning platforms dedicated to online sex work, and that several countries – including France – have tightened the rules concerning the verification of the majority.
If the text were adopted, it would upset the balance between freedom of expression and protection against explicit adult content, by giving the federal government unprecedented powers of censorship and prosecution, both for companies that distribute adult content and in the context of private exchanges.
0 Comments