Does a special condition of supervised release that prohibits possession or control of 'any pornographic matter' violate due process as unconstitutionally vague?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Does a special condition of supervised release that prohibits possession or control of “any pornographic matter” violate due process as unconstitutionally vague? II. Does a special condition of supervised release that prohibits possession or control of “any pornographic matter” violate the First Amendment? III. Even if a ban on “pornographic matter” does not ordinarily violate the First Amendment, did the district court’s interpretation of “pornographic” do so here when it found that adult women in bathing suits dancing on a beach was pornographic? i