Editing Legality of bestiality in the United States (section)

===== '''Federal Law''' =====
Laws against bestiality in the United States are largely a matter of state rather than federal jurisdiction, except for laws governing the District of Columbia and the U.S. Armed Forces. There is no federal law which explicitly prohibits sex between humans and animals.

The only federal law prohibiting zoophilic pornography, is 18 USC 2256, which prohibits distribution in interstate commerce and on federal property of child pornography of a minor under 18 years old engaging in "sexually explicit conduct" of bestiality.

[[File:Legality of sale and distribution of zoophilic pornography in the United States- .png|thumb|'''GREEN''' Sale and distribution of zoophilic pornography is legal  

'''YELLOW''' Sale and distribution of zoophilic pornography is a misdemeanor   

'''ORANGE''' Sale and distribution of zoophilic pornography is a misdemeanor or a felony  

'''RED'''  Sale and distribution of zoophilic pornography is a felony   

'''BROWN''' Sale and distribution of zoophilic pornography is illegal; unknown punishment

'''GRAY''' Unknown]]The Constitutional definition of obscenity was narrowed by the US Supreme Court in the 1985 case '''''Brockett v. Spokane Arcades, Inc'''.'', which the court endorsed the Model Penal Code of obscenity. The Model Penal Code prohibition against deviate sexual intercourse includes "sexual intercourse ''per os'' or ''per anum'' between human beings who are not husband and wife, and any form of sexual intercourse with an animal." Federal law does not ban obscenity outright; it leaves this to state and local law. Federal statutes prohibit, among other things, the transmission of obscene matter as defined by state law, in interstate commerce and on federal land.

Private Internet connections in the United States are not subject to censorship imposed by the government. However, private businesses, schools, libraries, and government offices may use filtering software at their discretion, and in such cases courts have ruled the use of such software does not violate the First Amendment.