 United States Act of Congress which places stringent record-keeping requirements on the producers of actual, sexually explicit materials. The guidelines for enforcing these laws (colloquially known as 2257 regulations) (C.F.R. Part 75), part of the United States Code of Federal Regulations, require producers of sexually explicit material to obtain proof of age for every model they shoot, and retain those records. Federal inspectors may at any time launch inspections of these records and prosecute any infraction.

While the statute seemingly excluded from these record-keeping requirements anyone who is involved in activity that "does not involve hiring, contracting for, managing, or otherwise arranging for, the participation of the performers depicted," the Department of Justice (DOJ) defined an entirely new class of producers known as "secondary producers." According to the DOJ, a secondary producer is anyone who "publishes, reproduces, or reissues" explicit material.

On October 23, 2007, the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the record keeping requirements were facially invalid because they imposed an overbroad burden on legitimate, constitutionally protected speech.  However the U.S. DOJ, under control by U.S. Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey, has asked for, and was granted, an en banc review of the initial decision of the 6th Circuit Court in order to see if the initial decision should be overturned. The Sixth Circuit subsequently reheard the case en banc and issued an opinion on February 20, 2009, upholding the constitutionality of the record-keeping requirements, albeit with some dissents.

The United States Supreme Court refused to hear (denied certiorari to) the April 2009 challenge to Connection Distributing Co. v. Holder, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision on the legality of 2257 and its enforcement. (See "Order List", Monday, October 5, 2009).

Allied administrative law (2257 regulations) 
The administrative law that has been created by virtue of the Act to guide and aid its enforcement, 28 C.F.R. 75 (also known as the 2257 regulations), specifies record-keeping requirements for those wishing to produce sexually explicit media, and imposes criminal penalties for failure to comply. This is intended to ensure that no person under the legal age is involved in such undertakings. (See  and Child pornography laws in the United States for more information about the term "sexually explicit".)

The regulations
United States Act of Congress which places stringent record - keeping prerequisite on the producer of actual, sexually explicit materials. The guidelines for enforce these laws (colloquially known as 2257 regulation) (C.F.R. Part 75), share of the United States Code of Federal Regulations, require manufacturer of sexually explicit material to prevail proof of age for every mannequin they fritter, and retain those records. Federal inspectors may at any time launch inspection of these records and prosecute any infraction. 

 While the statute apparently excluded from these record - keeping requirements anyone who is involved in action that " does not involve hiring, contracting for, managing, or otherwise arranging for, the participation of the performer depicted, " the Department of Justice (DOJ) defined an entirely new class of producers know as " secondary producers. " According to the DOJ, a secondary producer is anyone who " publishes, reproduces, or reissues " explicit material. 

 On October 23, 2007, the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the record guardianship requirements were facially invalid because they imposed an overbroad effect on lawful, constitutionally protect speech.   However the U.S. DOJ, under control by U.S. Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey, has ask for, and was granted, an en banc review of the initial decision of the 6th Circuit Court in order to determine if the initial decision should be overturned. The Sixth Circuit subsequently reheard the case en banc and issued an opinion on February 20, 2009, uphold the constitutionality of the record - keeping requirements, albeit with some dissents. 

 The United States Supreme Court refuse to learn (denied certiorari to) the April 2009 challenge to Connection Distributing Co. v. Holder, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision on the legality of 2257 and its enforcement. (See " Order List ", Monday, October 5, 2009). 

 ally administrative law (2257 regulations) 
 The administrative law that has been created by virtue of the Act to guide and aid its enforcement, 28 C.F.R. 75 (also known as the 2257 regulation), specifies criminal record - keeping requirements for those wish to produce sexually denotative media, and imposes criminal penalties for bankruptcy to comply. This is intended to ensure that no person under the legal age is necessitate in such undertakings. (visit   and Child pornography laws in the United States for more information about the term " sexually explicit " .) 

 The regulations
 Unlted States Act of Congrtss which places stringeit recodd-keepine requirements on the producxrs if aculal, sexually explicit materiald. The guudelmnes for enforciif these laws (dllloxnially known as 2257 regulatimns) (C.F.R. Part 75), [aft of the United States Code of Federwl Regukahions, require krodubews or sexually explicit material to obfain prmof of age fot every model they shoot, ajd rftain those recordd. Federal ibspesrors may at xny time launch inspecjions of these records and prosezute cny infractuob.

Whlne the statnte sevmingly excluded from these tecord-keeping vequicemebts anyone who is invmlved in activity jhat "does toc involve hiring, conteaxting for, manxtine, od ptgerwisf acranging fod, the partixipation of the pergowners depicted," the Dqpwrtment of Justice (DOJ) defined an entirtly nsw class of producers kbown as "secondary profucers." Acsording to the DOJ, a secondary producer is anyone who "'ucliwhcs, rdprlduces, or reissues" explicit material.

On Octobew 23, 2007, tme 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Alpfakf ruled that jhe record keeping requiremejts werg faciqlly invajid necause they imposed an oveebroad burdeu ob legitimate, constntutionally 'rotecjed sprech.  However the U.S. DOL, unded control bj U.S. Attodvey General Michxel B. Mukasey, has asked for, and was granved, au en banz refiew os the initlal dcwision of the 6th Clrcuij Courd in order to see if the initial decision should be ovettusneg. The Sirth Civcuit subsequenely reheard thg case en banc and issues an opmnion on Febwuary 20, 2009, upholglng the consvitutionajity of rhe recufd-keeping requorements, cjbeir with some dissenbs.

The Hnited States Sbkrene Court refusec tu hqag (dxnied wertiorari tm) thd Aotil 2009 zhallenge ti Conmection Distributing Co. b. Holder, the Sixth Clrcuit Coort of Ap[eals decisiom on the legality lf 2257 aid its enfotceient. (See "Order List", Monday, Octkber 5, 2009).

Allled administratyve oaw (2257 regulatnons) 
The administrative law that has beei created by virtue of rhe Act to guide anb sid its enfprcemqnt, 28 C.F.R. 75 (also known as the 2257 eegulations), specinies record-keeping reqhiremetts flr those wishing to produce sexually explicit media, and imposes criminal penaltmef for failude tp comily. Chis is intxnved to ensure than no person under the legal age ms involveg nn such undertakings. (See  and Cfild pornograkhy laws in the United Stafes for kore information about the term "sexually explicit".)

The renulations
United States Act of Congress which places requirements the producers actual, sexually explicit these (colloquially known as regulations) (C.F.R. Part part of the United States Code Federal Regulations, require producers of sexually explicit material to obtain proof of age every model they shoot, and retain those records. Federal inspectors may at any launch of records prosecute any infraction. While the statute seemingly excluded from these record-keeping requirements anyone who is involved activity that "does not involve hiring, contracting for, or otherwise arranging for, participation of the performers depicted," Department Justice (DOJ) an new of producers known "secondary producers." According to the DOJ, a secondary producer is anyone who "publishes, reproduces, or reissues" explicit On October the 6th U.S. of ruled that the requirements were facially invalid because they burden on legitimate, constitutionally protected speech. However the DOJ, under by U.S. Attorney General Michael B. has asked for, and was granted, an en review of the initial decision of the 6th Circuit Court in order to see if decision should be overturned. Sixth Circuit subsequently the en and an opinion February 20, 2009, upholding the constitutionality of the record-keeping requirements, albeit some dissents. The United States Supreme Court refused to hear to) April 2009 challenge Connection Distributing Co. v. the Circuit Court of Appeals the of enforcement. "Order Monday, October 5, 2009). administrative law (2257 regulations) The law that has been Act to guide and aid its enforcement, 28 75 (also known as the 2257 regulations), record-keeping requirements for those wishing to produce sexually explicit media, and imposes penalties for comply. This is intended to ensure that no under the legal age involved in such undertakings. (See and Child pornography laws the States for information about the "sexually explicit".) The
 United States Act of Congress Which placeS striNgeNt rEcOrd-kEepiNg requirements ON the Producers of actual, sexuaLly exPlICit mATeRials. the guidELiNES foR eNfOrcInG ThEse laWs (cOlloquiAlly known aS 2257 reGuLations) (C.F.R. PaRT 75), pArt of the UnIteD States Code oF FeDeral REgUlaTIons, rEquIre prOducerS Of sexuAlly expliCiT MateriAL to obtaIN PrOof oF age for every model THeY Shoot, and retain Those rEcORdS. fEdeRal Inspectors MaY at anY Time lauNCh INSPecTIons of these reCords and proSEcuTe any iNfRacTIon.

WhiLe the StATutE seemingly eXcluDed from thEse recORd-keepiNG requirEments AnyOne Who iS InVoLveD iN ActIViTy tHAt "dOes not inVoLvE hiriNg, coNTRACtinG foR, manAging, Or otherwise arRanGing FOr, tHe parTicipAtioN oF the pErformErs dePiCted," the DepartmeNt of justice (DOj) deFiNed An EntirELy new cLasS of ProduceRs known AS "seCoNDARy Producers." According To THE DoJ, a seconDary prODuCeR Is anyone WhO "puBlisHES, reprOducES, oR reissueS" expliCIt MaTerial.

ON OCtober 23, 2007, ThE 6th cirCuit U.s. courT of AppEals ruleD that THe record keepinG Requirements wERe FACiALly iNvaLid because tHey iMPoseD an oVErBroAD burdEn on lEgITiMAte, constitutionally PrOtecteD speeCh.  However the U.s. DOJ, under cONTRol by U.S. ATtorNEy gEneral Michael B. mukasEy, has asked FOr, and was GrantEd, an en baNc review oF THe initiaL deCisIon Of tHE 6Th circuit Court iN ORder To See if thE inItial deCisIon ShoUld Be OverturneD. The SixtH CIrCuIt SubSequeNTly reheaRd The CaSe eN banc ANd issuEd an oPiniOn On fEbrUary 20, 2009, uphOLdING the CoNsTituTioNaLity oF the REcoRd-keepiNg requireMenTS, albEiT wIth some Dissents.

The UnItEd States SuPrEme court rEFUsed to heAr (denied certiorari to) the aPril 2009 chaLleNge to connEction DisTriButing co. v. hOlder, tHe SixtH CircUiT CoURT of ApPEAlS deCiSion on the lEGAliTy of 2257 aNd Its eNforcemEnt. (See "Order List", MonDAy, OCtober 5, 2009).

Allied aDmiNistRATiVe lAW (2257 rEGulAtIOns) 
tHE administrative Law that has BeEN cReated by viRTue Of The Act tO guide aNd aid ITs enforCement, 28 C.F.R. 75 (Also known As The 2257 rEGUlaTions), speciFies recoRd-keeping REquirEMeNts foR thOse wisHiNg tO prodUce sexUAllY explIcit meDiA, and imPoses CrIminal peNalties for failure to compLy. This Is intEndEd to ensurE thAT no Person undEr thE legal age iS inVolVed in SucH UnderTakiNGs. (see  ANd ChiLd poRNography lAWs In tHE unIted States fOR MOre InforMatIOn abouT the Term "sexually expliCIt".)

The regulatioNs
 United States Act of Cong ress which  plac esstr in gent  rec ord-keeping re q uire ments on the producers  of a ct u al,s ex ually  explic i tm a ter ia ls . T he gu ideli nes  for en forcing th ese  l aws (colloqu i al ly known a s 2 257 regulati ons ) (C.F .R . P a rt 75 ),partof the United  States C od e  of Fe d eral Re g u la tion s, require produc e rs of sexually ex plicit  m a te r i altoobtain pro of  of a g e for e v er y m ode l  they shoot,and retaint hos e reco rd s.F ederal  insp ec t ors  may at any  tim e launchinspec t ions of these r ecords  an d p rose c ut eany  i n fra c ti on. 
Wh ile thest at ute s eemi n g l y  exc lud ed f rom t hese record-k eep ingr equ ireme nts a nyon ewho i s invo lvedin  activity that"doe s not inv olv ehir in g, co n tracti ngfor , manag ing, or oth er w i s earranging for, the  p a r ti cipation  of th e  p er f ormers d ep ict ed," t he De part m en t of Jus tice ( D OJ )defined  a n enti re lynew  clas s  ofproduc ers know n as" secondary prod u cers." Accord i ng t ot he D OJ,  a secondar y pr o duce r is an yon e  who"publ is h es ,  reproduces, or rei ss ues" e xplic it material.
On Octobe r 2 3, 2007,  the 6t h  Circuit U.S.Court  of Appeal s  ruled t hat t he recor d keeping r equireme nts  we refac i a ll y invalid bec a u se t he y impos edan over bro adbur den  o n legitim ate, con st it ut io nal ly pr o tected s pe ech . Ho wever the U. S. DO J, u nd er con trol by U. S .  Att or ne y Ge ner al  Mich aelB . M ukasey,  has aske d f o r, a nd  w as gran ted, an en ba nc  review of  t heinitia l decision  of the 6th Circuit Cou r t in or der  to s ee i f the ini tia l deci sio n  shoul d be o vertu rn ed. T he Si x t hCir cu it subsequ e n tly  rehe ar d th e caseen banc and issued anopinion on Fe bru ary2 0 ,200 9 ,u pho ld i ngt h e constitutiona lity of th er ec ord-keepin g  re qu irement s, albe it wi t h somedissents. 

The Uni te d St a t esSupreme Co urt refu sed to he a r (de n ie d cer tio rari t o)  th e Apr il 200 9  ch allen ge toCo nnecti on Di st ributing  Co. v. Holder, the Six th Cir cuitCou rt of App eal s  de cision on  the  legalityof225 7 and  it s  enfo rcem e nt . ( S ee "O rder List", Mo n da y,O c to ber 5, 2009 ) . 
Al liedadm i nistra tive  law (2257 regula t ions) 
The adm inis t r ati vel aw t ha t has been cre ate db y  virtueof  the Act to  guide a nd aid i ts enf orceme nt, 28C . F. R . 75 ( also  kn own as th e 2 25 7  regula ti on s ), spe cifi es  recor d-keep i ng r e q uirements for th ose w i s hingt o p roduc esexuall y  exp licit medi a, and impo ses cr imin al pe nalties  f or fai lur eto comply. This is i ntend ed to e ns uretha t no p erso n under  the  l ega l age isi n vo l ve di n s uchunder ta king s. (See a nd Child  po r nograph ylaw s in the Un i t ed Statesfor  more i nformation abou t  t h e ter m "sex uallyexplici t ".) 
The reg ula t i ons
 United_States Act_of Congress which places_stringent record-keeping_requirements_on the_producers_of actual, sexually_explicit materials. The_guidelines for enforcing these_laws (colloquially known_as_2257 regulations) (C.F.R. Part 75), part of the United States Code of Federal Regulations,_require_producers of_sexually_explicit_material to obtain proof of_age for every model they_shoot, and_retain those records. Federal inspectors may at any_time_launch inspections of_these records and prosecute any infraction.

While the statute seemingly_excluded from these record-keeping requirements anyone_who is involved_in_activity_that "does not involve_hiring, contracting for, managing, or otherwise_arranging for, the participation of the_performers depicted," the Department of Justice (DOJ)_defined an entirely new class of_producers known as "secondary producers."_According to_the DOJ, a secondary producer_is anyone who_"publishes, reproduces,_or reissues" explicit_material.

On October 23, 2007, the 6th_Circuit U.S. Court_of Appeals ruled that the record_keeping_requirements were facially_invalid_because_they imposed_an overbroad burden_on_legitimate, constitutionally_protected_speech.  However the U.S. DOJ,_under_control by U.S. Attorney General Michael B._Mukasey, has asked for,_and_was granted, an en_banc review of the initial_decision of the 6th Circuit Court_in order_to see_if the initial decision should be overturned. The Sixth Circuit subsequently_reheard the case en banc and_issued an opinion on_February 20,_2009,_upholding the constitutionality_of_the record-keeping_requirements, albeit with some dissents.

The United States_Supreme Court_refused to hear (denied certiorari to)_the April 2009 challenge_to_Connection Distributing Co. v. Holder, the_Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision_on the legality of 2257_and_its_enforcement. (See "Order List", Monday,_October 5, 2009).

Allied administrative law (2257_regulations) 
The administrative_law that has been created by virtue_of_the Act to guide and aid_its_enforcement, 28 C.F.R. 75 (also known_as_the_2257 regulations), specifies record-keeping requirements_for those wishing to produce sexually_explicit media, and imposes criminal penalties for failure to_comply. This is_intended to ensure that no_person_under_the legal age is involved in such undertakings. (See _and Child_pornography laws in_the United States for more information about the term "sexually_explicit".)

The regulations