Whether strict First Amendment scrutiny applies to a criminal law that prohibits nonconsensual dissemination of non-obscene nude or sexually-oriented visual material?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Through social media, millions of people share photographs and information about the intimate details of their lives. In response, forty-six states in recent years adopted laws to combat so-called “revenge porn,” the non-consensual dissemination of private sexual images. This case arises from a decision of the Illinois Supreme Court which upheld that state’s revenge porn law even though it is being used to prosecute an individual whose actions had nothing to do with either “revenge” or “porn.” The court’s review of the law under intermediate scrutiny is _ plainly inconsistent with recent decisions of this Court requiring strict First Amendment scrutiny of content-based laws, and conflicts with a Vermont Supreme Court ruling, which held the appropriate standard of review of such laws is strict scrutiny. The decision presents two critical questions of First Amendment law that go to the heart of preserving free expression as new technologies present special challenges, while providing guidance for states that seek to curtail harassment and abuse: 1. Whether strict First Amendment scrutiny applies to a criminal law that prohibits nonconsensual dissemination of non-obscene nude or sexuallyoriented visual material? 2. Whether the First Amendment requires a law that prohibits nonconsensual dissemination of non-obscene nude or sexually-oriented visual material to impose a requirement of specific intent to harm or harass the individual(s) depicted?