The US Supreme Court ultimately determined that the act's use of the terms "obscene" and "harmful to minors" was too vague, and that wholesale filtering of content violated the First Amendment.
結果，美國聯邦最高法院以該法中「不良」、「有損身心」等名詞定義過於模糊，及全面過濾資訊的作法，有侵害言論自由之虞，認定該法抵觸美國憲法第一修正案。