All that sales pitch about attending a big university so you can collaborate with other smart students and take advantage of vast resources? Screw that, that's now "cheating." Might as well take a correspondence course. (found at MetaFilter)

Or else. From Slate's Dahlia Lithwick:

The Fourth Amendment protects you from causeless, suspicionless searches by the government. You can just say no. I agree with Justice Kennedy on this one point, which he makes four or five times this morning: This democracy will be a much healthier one when Americans know their rights and assert them loudly and forcefully toward the police. I can't bring myself to agree with Kennedy's policy prescription, however, which seems to be that we should incarcerate anyone who doesn't know or assert their rights, until we are left with a citizenry consisting of those 400 citizens who are well-informed. So please cut and paste this paragraph into an e-mail and send it to 10 people, along with the threat that something terrible will happen to them if they don't forward it to 10 more. This isn't one of those woo-woo something-special-will-happen-to-you chain letters. ... Something really terrible will happen to you if you don't spread the word. Just ask Christopher Drayton and Layton Brown.

As Politech reports, two sections of CPPA were not litigated and therefore upheld. One was the old law that prohibited real children in sexual situations, and no one really opposes that. Another prohibits any "visual depiction that has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct."

"Identifiable" here means an image that's made to look like a specific, real child that can be identified. There's an argument that such fake images are still harmful to the children, and that may be more permissible than the same argument would be against an adult (other than civil right of privacy claims).

The US Supreme Court today overturned a popular law that, nonetheless, had to go. It's always hardest to defend really distasteful speech on First Amendment grounds, but the "Child Pornography Protection Act" took a ban on kiddie porn intended to protect children and extended it to punish people who hadn't directly or indirectly harmed any actual children at all. My explanation got long so it's on a separate page, and you may not agree with it, but there it is.