All The Tropes Wiki Project, Part XXVII

[GethN7]

Netflix is being indicted for the movie "Cuties" by the State of Texas, citing it was produced to appeal to the prurient interest concerning minors.

Just to follow up on this, I just stumbled across the following:

Judge dismisses Tyler County lawsuit against Netflix over ‘Cuties’ film

This happened a year ago.

There isn't much in the article -- by the time it came out the whole Cuties kerfluffle had turned into a nothingburger -- but basically the District Attorney petitioned the judge to dismiss the case on the grounds that (if I'm reading this correctly) the law that Netflix was indicted under was inapplicable.

“While the State believes the charged portion of Texas Penal Code 43.262 is constitutional, the facts of this case are better suited for other statutes”

 
And basically that's it.  As far as I can determine now that I'm actively looking, there was no further action against Netflix in the last year.  No child pornography, no great triumph over the librul mainstreem meedya by a crusading republican.  Just the DA, who would have prosecuted Netflix, telling the judge they had nothing in the way of a case.

EDIT:  Oh, wait, there is a little more.  Six months after the case was dismissed, a Federal judge blocked all further prosecution of Netflix in Texas because the charges were bogus -- the allegedly "underage" actress who was the basis for at least some of the child porn charges was over eighteen:

Section 43.25 [under which Netflix is prosecuted] is a child pornography statute, but the Court is unconvinced that Cuties contains child pornography. In all of Cuties, there are no sex scenes and there is only one scene that contains nudity. In that one scene, the Cuties are watching a video on one of their phones when a dancer in the video flashes her breast for a fraction of a second. But that dancer ("Jane Doe") was not a minor. Therefore, her nudity cannot constitute child pornography.

Further, evidence had been presented to him that the legal team behind the original indictment and an attempt at a second try at prosecuting Netflix knew this well before at least the second try but still claimed the actress was underage in the new indictment.

I've noted this before, but it seems the would-be censors are just as willing to lie about what they want to censor as they are to trust that their evidence is sufficient on its own.

Okay, seems I was wrong, and I'll eat crow on this.