Com 403 Chapter 13

Front 1

Obscenity

Back 1

Not protected by the First Amendment

Front 2

Indecency

Back 2

“Adult” or “sexually explicit” material
Protected by First Amendment
Can be restricted in works available to children or broadcast over public airwaves

Front 3

Miller v. California (U.S. 1973)

Back 3

1. An average person, applying contemporary local community standards, finds that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest
2. The work depicts in a patently offensive way sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law
3. The work in question lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value

Front 4

The Miller Test

Back 4

1. “Community standards”
Which community?
Venue shopping by prosecutors
2. “Patently offensive”
State law, but should be precise
Jenkins v. Georgia (U.S. 1974)
3. “Serious value”
Reasonable person standard
Pope v. Illinois (U.S. 1987)

Front 5

Variable Obscenity

Back 5

Can have different regulations for adults vs. kids
Ginsburg v. New York (U.S. 1968)

Front 6

Child Pornography

Back 6

Absolutely no First Amendment right to produce, distribute, or possess
Government restrictions do not have to pass Miller test
New York v. Ferber (U.S. 1982)

Front 7

Zoning Regulations

Back 7

OK if designed to combat secondary effects
Cannot completely ban the businesses
Renton v. Playtime Theatres (U.S. 1986)

Front 8

Expressive Conduct Regulations

Back 8

Dancers, customers, etc. have free speech rights, but can be limited
Cannot completely ban the expression
City of Erie v. Pap’s AM (U.S. 2000)

Front 9

Sexually Oriented Businesses
Zoning Regulations

Back 9

OK if designed to combat secondary effects
Cannot completely ban the businesses
Renton v. Playtime Theatres (U.S. 1986)

Front 10

Sexually Oriented Businesses
Expressive Conduct Regulations

Back 10

Dancers, customers, etc. have free speech rights, but can be limited
Cannot completely ban the expression
City of Erie v. Pap’s AM (U.S. 2000)

Front 11

Communications Decency Act (1996)

Back 11

Unconstitutional: too much burden on speech
Reno v. ACLU (U.S. 1997)

Front 12

Child Online Protection Act (1998)

Back 12

Unconstitutional: too restrictive
Ashcroft v. ACLU (U.S. 2004)

Front 13

Children’s Internet Protection Act (2001)

Back 13

Constitutional: rights and restrictions balanced
U.S. v. American Library Assoc. (U.S. 2002)