Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
United States, 165 U.S. 486 (1897), which upheld a conviction for mailing and delivering a newspaper called the Chicago Dispatch, which contained "obscene, lewd, lascivious, and indecent materials". Another case was A Book Named "John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure" v.
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957), along with its companion case Alberts v.California, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States which redefined the constitutional test for determining what constitutes obscene material unprotected by the First Amendment. [1]
The Commission's report, called Report of the Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, [5] and published in 1970, recommended sex education, funding of research into the effects of pornography and restriction of children's access to pornography, and recommended against any restrictions for adults. On balance the report found that obscenity and ...
These common-law ideas of obscenity formed the original basis of obscenity law in other common law countries, such as the United States. The classic definition of criminal obscenity is if it "tends to deprave and corrupt", stated in 1868 by Lord Justice Cockburn, in Regina v. Hicklin, now known as the Hicklin test.
The Miller test, also called the three-prong obscenity test, is the United States Supreme Court's test for determining whether speech or expression can be labeled obscene, in which case it is not protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and can be prohibited.
Specifically, it is a violation of federal law to broadcast obscene, indecent or profane programming. Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1464 prohibits the utterance of any 'obscene, indecent or profane language by means of radio communication.'" [ 6 ] The range of the FCC's authority over censorship for inappropriate conduct on the ...
The document seeks to create a national backdoor abortion ban by invoking the Comstock Act — a 150-year-old law that criminalizes sending “obscene” materials in the mail, including anything ...
defaming the government is 'an inalienable privilege of national citizenship.' [8] On appeal once again, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that its first decision left little question as to the constitutionality of the statute, both under the defendants' state constitutional challenge and a new argument based on due process under the 14th ...