The Supremes have struck down a law banning "virtual" child pornography (porn that simulates the activities of children rather than actually using kids in its creation). Interestingly, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas concurred in a separate opinion.

The O'Toole File, which is no fan of Justice Thomas', suspects the worst: Some liberals will snarkily suggest that his supposed taste for porn influenced his decision.

As disgusting as this fake kiddie-porn stuff is, there's a legitimate First Amendment issue here. And Clarence Thomas deserves credit for understanding that fact.
--------