The latest Congressional attempt to curb the spread of child pornography on the Internet – the 2003 law that makes it a crime to offer or solicit sexually explicit images of children, was upheld by the Supreme Court on Monday.

The apex court maintained that Congress's remedy for a growing problem on the Internet does not violate free-speech guarantees. In its 7 to 2 vote, the court also concluded that the law that criminalized "pandering" of real or purported child pornography online or through the mail is not unconstitutionally vague. The majority dismissed what it called "fanciful hypotheticals" that the law might make movie reviewers or even unsuspecting grandparents subject to its standards.

"We hold that offers to provide or requests to obtain child pornography are categorically excluded from the First Amendment," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the 7-to-2 majority.

Justices David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented, saying "the First Amendment protection of expression . . . requires a limit" even in pursuit of a worthy goal.

The law at issue was a response to a Supreme Court ruling in 2002, a decision that found unconstitutional an earlier law that prohibited simple possession of purported child pornography even if the material turned out not to depict real children. The First Amendment was violated by a law that “prohibits the visual depiction of an idea,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said in the 2002 decision.

Justice Scalia asserted on Monday that by limiting the crime to the “pandering” of child pornography, the new law represented “a carefully crafted attempt to eliminate the First Amendment problems we identified” in the earlier decision.