In the 1994 case United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a federal law prohibiting the distribution of child pornography did not violate First Amendment rights to free speech or Fifth Amendment due process rights. The defendants, X-Citement Video and its owner Rubin Gottesman, were convicted under this law for knowingly distributing videos featuring an underage performer. They appealed their conviction arguing that the statute was unconstitutional because it criminalized conduct protected by the First Amendment and failed to require proof of knowledge about the performer's age as part of its mens rea requirement (the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing). However, in a 7-2 decision authored by Justice Rehnquist, SCOTUS upheld their convictions stating that "knowingly" applied to all elements in each section including age thus satisfying constitutional requirements for scienter (knowledge) while also affirming Congress' power to regulate child pornography irrespective of whether it could be classified as obscene material under existing standards.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc., case argued that the majority's interpretation of 18 U.S.C §2252 was incorrect and inconsistent with its plain language. The dissent contended that Congress intended to criminalize only those actions where an individual knowingly transported or received child pornography, not instances where they were unaware of the age of the individuals depicted. They believed this interpretation better aligned with Congressional intent to protect minors from sexual exploitation while also safeguarding First Amendment rights by avoiding overbroad restrictions on adult pornography. Furthermore, they criticized the majority for reading a scienter requirement into every element of §2252 despite no clear indication from Congress to do so; such judicial legislation should be avoided unless absolutely necessary to prevent constitutional issues or absurd results.