Washington ( CNN ) -- President Barack Obama has signed a law that specifically bans so-called `` crush videos '' -- depictions of small animals being tortured to death by humans . The legislation came in response to a Supreme Court ruling this year striking down a broader congressional law dealing with animal cruelty . The Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act criminalizes the creation , sale , and marketing of these specific kinds of videos , which lawmakers had labeled as `` obscene . '' Penalties of up to seven years in prison would be possible . The videos mostly depict women -- with their faces unseen -- stomping helpless animals such as rabbits to death with spiked-heel shoes or with their bare feet . The videos apparently satisfy a sexual fetish for those who produce and watch them , said animal rights activists who supported the new bill . `` By cracking down on the creation and distribution of crush videos , this bipartisan law effectively protects both animals and free speech , '' said Sen. Jeff Merkley , D-Oregon , one of the co-sponsors of the bill . Sens . Jon Kyl , R-Arizona , and Richard Burr , R-North Carolina , also helped draft the legislation . Supporters said the high court ruling opened the door for Congress to craft a `` narrowly tailored '' bill aimed at banning this specific type of commercial activity . `` We are thankful that countless animals will now be spared from intentional torture for sick entertainment and profit , '' said Wayne Pacelle of the Humane Society of the United States , which has worked for years to stop the mostly underground activity . The justices by an 8-1 margin struck down a broader 1999 federal law designed to stop the sale and marketing of videos showing dogfighting and other acts of animal cruelty , saying it was an unconstitutional violation of free speech . That specific case dealt with a Virginia man who sold videos of dogs fighting each other at an overseas location . But the lone dissenter , Justice Samuel Alito focused his attention on crush videos . `` The animals used in crush videos are living creatures that experience excruciating pain . Our society has long banned such cruelty , '' he said . The courts , he said , have `` erred in second-guessing the legislative judgment about the importance of preventing cruelty to animals . '' Alito at the time predicted mores crush videos would soon flood the underground market , because the ruling has `` the practical effect of legalizing the sale of such videos . '' Lawmakers had promised to craft bills banning those types of videos . It was unclear if further legal challenges would result , following the president signing it into law . When it came to dog-fighting videos , `` The First Amendment itself reflects a judgment by the American people that the benefits of its restrictions on the government outweigh its costs , '' said Chief Justice John Roberts . He concluded Congress had not sufficiently shown `` depictions '' of dogfighting were enough to justify a special category of exclusion from free speech protection . Nearly every state and local jurisdiction have their own laws banning mistreatment of wild and domesticated animals , and usually handle prosecutions . Several media organizations had supported Robert Stevens -- the man behind the dogfighting videos -- worrying the federal law could implicate reports about deer hunting , and depictions of bullfighting in Ernest Hemingway novels . Stevens has defended his dogfighting videos as educational in nature , and has said the confrontations themselves did not violate any state laws since they were taped overseas . The Humane Society , other animal rights groups , and 26 states backed the government 's original high court challenge appeal . If that 11-year-old law had been upheld , it would have been only the second time the Supreme Court had identified a form of speech undeserving of protection by the First Amendment . The justices in 1982 banned the distribution of child pornography . There was no immediate criticism of the president 's action , but even this new more narrowly written law may face future legal challenges . The crush videos do not specifically depict a sexual act , and so there may be questions over whether the videos are in fact `` obscene , '' at least by traditional legal and social standards . The justices are currently considering a separate case dealing with so-called `` violent '' video games , and a California law that would ban the sale of such material to minors . The high court is being asked to treat violent material -- as defined by the state -- the same as obscene material , when imposing restrictions on their sale .
President Obama signs bill to ban `` crush videos '' Lawmakers have called such videos obscene . U.S. Supreme Court struck down a broader law in dogfighting case .