Previous 1 / 43 Next

2019 IL 123910 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS (Docket No. 123910) THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellant, v. BETHANY AUSTIN, Appellee. Opinion filed October 18, 2019. JUSTICE NEVILLE delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Chief Justice Karmeier and Justices Thomas, Kilbride, and Burke concurred in the judgment and opinion. Justice Garman dissented, with opinion, joined by Justice Theis. OPINION ¶1 Defendant Bethany Austin was charged with violating section 11-23.5(b) of the Criminal Code of 2012 (720 ILCS 5/11-23.5(b) (West 2016)), which criminalizes the nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images. On defendant’s motion, the circuit court of McHenry County dismissed the charge, finding that provision

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

People v. Austin

Case Law

Country

United States

Country Location

Latitude: 39.778231903243785

Longitude: -100.8801256788983

Country Location (linked Case Law): United States

Decision Date: Oct 18, 2019

Case Status: Closed

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Admissible
Reversed and Remanded

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Law or Action Upheld
Sanctions (Imprisonment and/or Fine)

Keywords

Cyber Security
Cybercrime
Digital Rights
Pornography
Privacy, Data Protection and Retention

Judicial Body: Supreme Court (court of final appeal)

Court Name: Supreme Court of the State of Illinois

Case Number: 2019 IL 123910

Case Summary: On October 18, 2019, the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois (“the Court”) upheld a “revenge porn” statute i.e. Section 11-23.5(b) of the Criminal Code of 2012, and decided that prohibiting the nonconsensual dissemination does not restrict freedom of speech and expression.

The defendant Bethany Austin discovered an exchange between her to-be husband Matthew and her neighbour Ms. Dreher. The exchange revealed an affair between them. Later, in response, Austin sent a letter to Matthew’s family and close friends in which she disclosed the affair and attached copies of text messages and four nude photographs of Ms. Dreher.

Ms. Austin was charged under Section 11-23.5(b). The Circuit Court, however, dismissed the charge on the grounds that the provision violated her right to free speech. In an Appeal filed by the State, the Supreme Court of Illinois reversed and remanded for further proceedings. The Court found that the statute serves a substantial government interest unrelated to freedom of speech suppression. It is only for the protection of privacy rights and the Court concluded that the statute did not burden more speech than necessary, since it restricted its application to detailed and specific circumstances.

Eventually, a writ petition of certiorari was filed by Ms. Austin with the U.S. Supreme Court in early 2020, however, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the petition in October 2020.

Case Significance: The decision has a mixed outcome since it upholds the constitutionality of a “revenge porn statute” that may catch within its ambit speech that is not necessarily malicious.

The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Source URL: Global Freedom of Expression

Related Caselaw (self)

United States

Collection

CIPIT
Columbia

Date Updated: Oct 30, 2023

Primary Documents

People v. Austin .pdf
english
Download View