Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
9 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Hicklin Rule |
from Regina v. Hicklin (1868) which involved criticism of Catholic religion. "The test of obscenity is this, whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall." |
|
|
Hicklin Rule in US |
Adopted into US courts and accepted by SC in the 1896 case Rosen v United States. |
|
|
Roth Test |
Test that replaced the Hicklin rule as the Hicklin rule gradually eroded. Replaced in 1957 during case Roth v. United States. |
|
|
Obscenity pre 1957 |
Defined by disparate and unpredictable standards by police, prosecutors, judges & juries in various parts of the country. 1949 - in addition to calculated excitement of sexual desire, a work is legally obscene when it creates a danger of incitement to criminal conduct. |
|
|
Obscenity post Roth v. United State |
Described as (1) worthless and (2) sexually lewd, meaning (a) whether to the average person, (b) applying contemporary community standards, (c) the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole, (d) appeals to prurient interest. |
|
|
Roth Test Refined |
Refined in 1973 during Miller v California. Changed in following ways: 1 - Discarding the "utterly worthless" requirement and defining "contemporary community standards" to mean state or local standards - not necessarily national ones. 2 - Requiring that state laws must be clear and specific in describing the type of sexual conduct covered by obscenity legislation. |
|
|
Miller v. California (1973) |
Voted 5-4 to vacate and remand conviction of Miller. ** This case established the three-part "Miller test" to define obscene speech. |
|
|
The Miller Test of Obscene Speech |
1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary standards of the state or local community, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; 2. Whether the work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; 3. Whether the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (sometimes called the "SLAPS test") |
|
|
Pornography |
First Amendment protects pornography that is NOT obscene speech or child pornography. Osborne v. Ohio (1990) it is a crime to "possess or view any material or performance that shows a minor who is not the person's child or ward in a state of nudity. How do you apply local community standards to internet? Unresolved. Jacobson v. United States (1992) - it is illegal for government agencies to "entrap"
|
