CP isn't a free speech issue. It's a child abuse issue. Even a hypothetical no-holds-barred free speech extremist situation, CP would still be illegal.
I completely agree that it child porn exposes children to abuse and should be illegal, but it’s important to note how proponents of that medium argue for its legitimacy.
Distributing sexual images of someone without their consent is a clear crime against that person. Children can not consent.
This is what they always say. All of the exceptions get some reason why they don't count as free speech. Why can't this argument be used on both sides?