|
Roth v. U.S.
(1957) pp. 735-747 -mailed ads for obscenity -obscenity is that material seen without redeeming social value -average person, applying contemporary community standards; dominant theme appeals to the prurient interest Stanley v. Georgia
(1969) pp. 764-767 -authorities found obscene materials in a home -possession of obscene materials may not be prosecuted -obscenity may satisfy emotional and intellectual needs -reads privacy into 1st Amendment Miller v. California
(1973) pp. 768-773 -reaffirmation of Roth -unsolicited obscenity illegal--we don't want it going to children -obscenity to be determined by applying "contemporary community standards", not "national standards" Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton
(1973) pp. 773-776 -reaffirmation of Roth -commerce of obscene material is unprotected by any constitutional doctrine of privacy -states have a legitimate interest in regulating commerce in obscene material and in regulating exhibition of obscene material in places of public accommodation Reno v. ACLU
(1997) pp. 802-809 F: Communications Decency Act set in place to prevent indecency/obscenity over the internet to those under 18 years of age. ACLU brought suit against the government. I: Whether the CDA violates the 1st Amendment. H: Yes. R: The CDA is both overbroad and vague--it prohibits too much speech, especially for consenting adults, and regulates conduct, which is unconstitutional. The internet is not like broadcast and not like zoning. Ru: The CDA was struck down because it prohibits too much speech and attempts to regulate conduct. Pico
(1982) pp. 347-358 -concerning whether local school board may remove books from school libraries -parents said that the school board had a moral obligation to get rid of filthy, unAmerican, and antisemetic books -Court found that this act is unconstitutional--viewpoint based regulations are not allowed Renton v. Playtime Theatres
(1986) -zoning of pornography; can't be within 1000 feet of any church, school, or residence |
Assc, Parties and Pol Campaigns
Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Hurley v. Irish-American GLIB Commercial Speech Red Lion Broadcasting v. FCC Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada 44 Liquormart v. Rhode Island Central Hudson v. Public Service Commission Defamation and Torts Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc. Time Inc. v. Hill NY Times v. Sullivan Hustler v. Falwell Bartnicki v. Vopper Dun & Bradstreet v. Greenmoss Builders Establishment Clause Alleghany v. ACLU Lemon v. Kurtzman First Amendment Theories Bickel Kairys Gitlow v. NY US v. O'Brien Miton Friedman John Stuart Mill Free Exercise Smith v. ...Oregon Sherbert v. Verner Wisco v. Yoder Illegal Advocacy NYT Company v. US (Pentagon Papers) Dennis v. U.S. Whitney v. California Abrams v. U.S. Sept 11, 1st Amend, and the Advocacy of Violence Hess v. Indiana Brandenburg v. Ohio Schenck v. US Lecture Notelets 4/4/02 2/26/02 2/11/02 Section 1/24/02 Offensive Language and Hate Speech Wisconsin v. Mitchell R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul Cohen v. California Texas v. Johnson Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire Public Property and Sector Southworth Rosenberger v. University of Virginia Abood v. Detroit Education Tinker v. Des Moines School District Rock Against Racism Perry Education v. Teacher's Association Rust v. Sullivan Sexual Material Renton v. Playtime Theatres Pico Reno v. ACLU Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton Miller v. California Stanley v. Georgia Roth v. U.S. |