> 1. Bomb-making instructions are now illegal on the Net, courtesy of > Feinstein and her ilk. (I don't recall the exact name of the act, but > it was discussed a couple of years ago. So far as I know, it passed > and was signed into law. Anyone know for sure? Also, this has not > been tested in court and will likely be struck down on First > Amendment grounds.) During the 104th Congress, Feinstein got an anti-bomb-speech amendment (S. Amdt. 1209) attached to the Senate's Comprehensive Terrorism Prevention Act of 1995 (S.735). The bill ultimately became PL 104-132, but did not contain Feinstein's little amendment. Instead, the final version contained in Section 709, a request that the Attorney General make a "determination of [the] constitutionality of restricting the dissemination of bomb-making instructional materials." Next time around (105th Congress), she proposed an amendment (S. Amdt. 419) to the National Defense Authorization Act (Fiscal Year 1998, S. 936`). The purpose of her amendment was "to prohibit the distribution of certain information relating to explosives, destructive devices, and weapons of mass destruction." (oh my!) Some commentary from the introduction of this amendment: <http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1997_cr/970619-cr1.htm> --- Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I send this amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator Biden and myself. For 3 years, Senator Biden and I have sent an amendment to the desk which would prohibit the teaching of bomb making. Twice it passed this body by unanimous consent, and twice in conference the amendment was taken out. Last year, when we made this amendment and this body graciously and, I believe, wisely accepted it, it was replaced in conference with the proviso that the Department of Justice would do a report to see whether this amendment was well advised and would stand a constitutional test. On April 29 of this year, the Department of Justice published a report, and that report was entitled, `Report on the Availability of Bomb Making Information, The Extent to Which Its Dissemination is Controlled by Federal Law, and the Extent to Which Such Dissemination May be Subject to Regulation Consistent with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.' The bottom line of the report is that the Department of Justice agrees that it would be appropriate and beneficial to adopt further legislation to address the problem of teaching bomb making directly, if that can be accomplished in a manner that does not impermissibly restrict the wholly legitimate publication and teaching of such information or otherwise violate the first amendment. In other words, the question presented by this is, when does the first amendment end and when does conspiracy to commit a felony begin? ... Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Feinstein-Biden anti-bomb-making amendment. The bill would make it a Federal crime to teach someone how to use or make a bomb if you know or intend that it will be used to commit a crime. As my colleagues know, I fought to pass nearly identical legislation last year. Senator Feinstein and I tried several times to have it enacted as part of my anti-terrorism initiatives. The bill passed the Senate on two occasions, but unfortunately, it was rejected by the House both times. Critics of the bill claimed that it was unnecessary, unconstitutional, and would outlaw legitimate business uses of explosives. ... I am glad that the Senate voted last year to join Senator Feinstein and me in making this type of behavior a crime. I hope this time around, we can pass this legislation through the full Congress and send it on to the President so he can sign it into law. --- Feinstein's amendment was approved in the Senate, as was the bill to which it was attached. It was referred to a House committee from there, but it doesn't look like it made it through the House. I can't find any anti-bomb-speech bills in the 106th Congress...but, of course, that doesn't mean there aren't any lurking there anyway. IaNaL.
