Whether a communication between just two individuals is sufficient contact to satisfy the requirement of giving notice to make, print or publish the distribution of child pornography

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW A panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a oneto-one communication can satisfy the requirement in 18 U.S.C. § 2251(d)(1)(A) that it is illegal to give a “notice” to make, print or publish child pornography. United States v. Sarah Melisa Cox, 963 F.3d 915 (9" Cir. June 6, 2020). The court chose not to follow the decision by a panel in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Caniff, 955 F.3d 1833 (11 Cir. April 9, 2020) (Caniff ID that giving notice required more than a one-to-one communication. The panel in Caniff IT reversed its earlier decision that an exchange from one individual to another, was sufficient for conviction. United States v. Caniff, 916 F.3d 929 (11 Cir. 2019) (Caniff I.) This case, therefore, presents the following question: whether a communication between just two individuals is sufficient contact to satisfy the requirement of giving notice to make, print or publish the distribution of child pornography. 1