Michael Williams is accused of using online chat rooms to peddle what he claimed to be pornographic pictures of his daughter. One of his buyers was an undercover police officer. Prosecutors charged Williams under the PROTECT Act of 2003; a law that prohibits the selling of obscene photos of minors. But when a court looked at the pictures, it determined they were not pornographic and ruled Williams could not be charged. Pat Trueman with the Alliance Defense Fund hopes the Supreme Court disagrees.

“What is at issue here is this longstanding practice of pandering as a crime, when you believe you’ve committed a crime, you’ve taken every step to commit that crime; is it a crime? Courts have always said ‘yes.’”

And agents found other pictures on Williams’ computer, and that’s why Trueman expects a different ruling from the Supreme Court.

“Because we know the defendant was actually selling some child pornography – it’s just that the pictures of his own child weren’t child pornography.”

Brad Dacus with the Pacific Justice Institute says there are liberals on the high court that will turn this into a free speech issue, but overall, he has high hopes for the outcome.

“I believe that the majority on the Supreme Court will recognize the compelling need of the legislature and Congress and to pass laws that do what is necessary to protect innocent little children from being sexually molested and abused.”

You can look for the Supreme Court to hear this case on October 30th.