enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. United States obscenity law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_obscenity_law

    Georgia that state laws making mere private possession of obscene material a crime are invalid, [58] at least in the absence of an intention to sell, expose, or circulate the material. Subsequently, however, the Supreme Court rejected the claim that under Stanley there is a constitutional right to provide obscene material for private use [ 59 ...

  3. Stanley v. Georgia - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_v._Georgia

    Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that helped to establish an implied "right to privacy" in U.S. law in the form of mere possession of obscene materials.

  4. List of landmark court decisions in the United States

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court...

    Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957) Obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment. (Superseded by Miller v. California (1973)) One, Inc. v. Olesen, 355 U.S. 371 (1958) Pro-homosexual writing is not per se obscene. It was the first U.S. Supreme Court ruling to address free speech rights with respect to homosexuality.

  5. Wealthy Florida real estate brothers' 'trophies' uncovered as ...

    www.aol.com/wealthy-florida-real-estate-brothers...

    High-profile Real Estate Brother Misses Hearing After Mix-up In Identical Twins' Sex Trafficking Case Oren and Alon Alexander attend Jeff Gordon's Last Lap on November 22, 2015, at The Villa, Casa ...

  6. List of sex-related court cases in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sex-related_court...

    Obscenity is defined as material that "to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interest". One, Inc. v. Olesen, 355 U.S. 371 (1958) *. Applying the Roth test, the Court rules that homosexual content is not by definition obscene. Poe v.

  7. How Can I Avoid Adverse Possession on a Real Estate ... - AOL

    www.aol.com/finance/avoid-adverse-possession...

    Adverse possession is a legal concept that occurs when a trespasser, someone with no legal title, can gain legal ownership over a piece of property if the actual owner does not challenge it within ...

  8. Squatters Beware: States Are Revising Adverse Possession Laws

    www.aol.com/news/on-squatters-beware-states-are...

    Anyone hoping to claim any one of thousands of foreclosed homes in Florida through adverse possession -- simply squatting on the land for several years to obtain title to the home -- are out of luck.

  9. Roth v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roth_v._United_States

    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]

  1. Related searches illegal possession of obscene material in chicago real estate market in florida

    is obscene material illegalobscenity laws in america
    obscene material laws