Roth v. U.S.: Supreme Court Rules Obscene Material Not Protected by First Amendment

Roth v. U.S.: Supreme Court Rules Obscene Material Not Protected by First Amendment

Roth v. United States

Timeline of History

History Topics
Countries

Argued: Roth v. United States — The U.S. Supreme Court will rule that 'obscene' material is not protected by the First Amendment because freedom of expression does not give people absolute protection for every possible utterance.

From the majority opinion:

"...implicit in the history of the First Amendment is the rejection of obscenity as utterly without redeeming social importance. ...However, sex and obscenity are not synonymous.

Obscene material is material which deals with sex in a manner appealing to prurient interest. The portrayal of sex, e. g., in art, literature and scientific works, is not itself sufficient reason to deny material the constitutional protection of freedom of speech and press. ...

It is therefore vital that the standards for judging obscenity safeguard the protection of freedom of speech and press for material which does not treat sex in a manner appealing to prurient interest."

Read More: Roth v. United States

User comments

There are no user comments for this item.

Ratings (the higher the better)
Interesting
Comment
    Please enter the security code.
 
 
Powered by JReviews

Today's Major Events

Spanish Archbishop Casado: Civil Penalties for Sexual Abuse are Unwarranted
Film 'All Quiet on the Western Front' Opens in America
Tariq ibn Ziyad Crosses from Africa to Europe, Begins Muslim Invasion of Europe
Photos of Abuse and Humiliation of Iraqi Prisoners at Abu Ghraib Prison Released
U.S. Army Liberates Dachau Concentration Camp