Can a liberal society like America ban the viewing of child pornography? Yes, although explaining why takes a surprising amount of work. U.S. Supreme Court precedent discusses child pornography in terms of harm and economics. This misses the heart of the matter, and the liberalization of the law toward sexual vices, including obscenity, has left child pornography doctrine isolated.<\/p>\n
Rethinking two underdeveloped areas of law\u2014children\u2019s rights and privacy rights\u2014would help make sense of banning child pornography. This article uses approaches including social and legal history, feminism, vulnerability theory, technology, secular and Christian ethics, and childism to propose that the law should recognize children\u2019s negative right to intimate privacy<\/strong>. Doing so would help reframe the viewing of child pornography as a rights violation. While building off the work of other scholars who address sexual privacy rights and children\u2019s privacy rights, this article\u2019s synthesis uniquely condemns viewing child pornography as a rights violation.<\/p>\n It also addresses practical legal issues. Its rights framing would rationalize several areas of law, including the ban on possessing child pornography and anti-voyeurism measures. It would also help address emerging challenges like \u201crevenge porn\u201d and child pornography generated by artificial intelligence. This article closes by suggesting that ethical values should supplement legal rights.<\/p>\n The social consensus against child pornography has masked doctrinal problems that should be remedied. Failing to do so leaves child victims on the sidelines\u2014as objects<\/em> of both child pornography and the laws banning it, but not subjects in their own right.<\/p>\n