What is Obscenity?
What is your Definition?
Are These Obscene?
Roth v US (1957)



Samuel Roth –business operator in a “red
light” district.
Sold sexually explicit pictures, books and
magazines
Federal law forbade using the U.S. Mail for
any materials that would “stir sexual
impulses and lead to sexually impure
thoughts.”
Roth Arguments




Expression protected regardless of its
popularity or subject matter/not a violation of
national security.
Federal statute defined obscenity in a vague
manner.
Stirring sexual impulses could be anything.
Provdied no “clear and present danger”
U.S


1st Amendment doesn’t protect all forms of
speech.
Materials lacked any “redeeming social
values”
Jacobellis v OH (1964)

Changed to national standards

Knew obscenity when they saw it
Miller v California (1973)

Citizens of Newport Beach were receiving
advertisements with photos of people
engaged in sex acts.
–
Violated State Criminal Code of CA
Arguments - Miller


CA law and its local application exceeded
guidelines of Roth.
Cannot have hundreds of definitions of
obscenity and pornography
Arguments – Newport


Right not to be confronted by patently filthy
material arriving unwanted at their homes.
Protect public health, safety, welfare and
morals.
3 Part Test Decision



Material taken as a whole appeals to a
prurient interest.
Lacks serious literary, artistic, political or
scientific value
Violates a community standard
Stanley v Georgia (1969)

The state cannot make it a crime to possess
obscene material for his or her own use his
or her home.
Osborne v OH (1990)


Crime to possess pornographic photographs
of children even in the privacy of ones own
home.
Upheld Ohio law which
–
–
Portrayed a minor in a “state of nudity” if that
constituted lewd exhibition or a graphic focus on
genitals.
Exception – material possessed by the child’s
parents for a bona fide artistic, educational or
scientific purpose.