0
What 1973 US Supreme Court case held that obscenity must be defined by contemporary community standards?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Miller v. California, 413 US 14 (1973)
In Miller, the Supreme Court established a three-prong test to determine whether something met the definition of obscenity.
For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What is freedom of obscenity?
Freedom of obscenity . . . sounds like a free speech right from the Bill of Rights. The US Supreme Court has also said that local communities can have freedom from obscenity if they base it on the moral standards of a particular community.
What is legal test for obscenity?
The Miller Test is the current "test" used by Supreme Court Justices for obscenity. It basically states that if a creation has no artistic value whatsoever ("filth for the sake of filth") then it can be considered obscene.
What is the name of the test used by the US Supreme Court to determine whether speech or expression can be labeled obscene?
The Miller Test, or "Three Prong Obscenity Test," was established via the US Supreme Court's decision in Miller v. California, 413 US 14 (1973).The criteria a trier-of-fact must consider when determining whether material is obscene follows:"(a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, [Roth, supra, at 489,](b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. If a state obscenity law is thus limited, First Amendment values are adequately protected by ultimate independent appellate review of constitutional claims when necessary."In Jacobelis v. Ohio, 378 US 184 (1964) Court determined "obscenity" did not qualify for First Amendment protection, but were unable to agree on a definition or standard. Justice Potter Stewart's famous quote best summarized the dilemma of the Court:"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced...but I know it when I see it..."The Supreme Court attempted to address the issue a second time in Roth v. United States, 354 US 476 (1957), but the opinion in that case gave little more guidance:"The standard for judging obscenity, adequate to withstand the charge of constitutional infirmity, is whether, to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interest."The Miller Test incorporated the definition in Roth, which the Court held to be unconstitutional on its own, but expanded the criteria in an effort to introduce more considerations, as a proxy for objectivity. The "three prongs" listed above comprise the current obscenity test (2010).For more information, see Related Questions, below.
What are the rules by which the Supreme Court judges obscenity cases?
1) A thing must be prurient in nature 2) A thing must be completely devoid of scientific, political, educational, or social value 3) A thing must violate the local community standards If it meets all three of the above, it is obscenity.
Did the case of Miller v California deal with the issues of obscenity and the opinion was written by wareen burger?
Miller v California was a Landmark United States Supreme Court case that changes the precedence involving what constitutes unprotected obscenity for First Amendment purposes. The decision reiterated that obscenity was not protected by the First Amendment and established the a test called the Miller Test for determining what material was deemed obscene.
What is the Supreme Court tests for unprotected speech?
The Supreme Court has recognized certain categories of speech as unprotected, including obscenity, incitement to violence, fighting words, and true threats. The tests used to determine if speech falls into these categories include the Miller test for obscenity, the Brandenburg test for incitement, and the Chaplinsky test for fighting words. These tests involve examining whether the speech meets specific criteria related to its nature, intent, and likelihood to cause harm or violence.
How has the US Supreme Court's interpretation of obscenity changed over time?
That has greatly varied. The most serious attempt to define it was when it was ruled that in order for something to be regarded as "obscene" it would have to utterly lack any " scientific, literary, artistic, political or social value", often called the SLAPS test. (The current standard is called the Miller Test; see Related Questions)It has also depended on "community values", a rather nebulous term that in all practicality means "whatever the loudest citizen's group in your town can bully the DA into prosecuting".It has even been circularly defined. As in: What is" Obscenity"? See prurient. What is "Prurient"? See obscenity.Justice Potter Stewart, in 1964, quite honestly admitted that he could not define obscenity, but famously said, "I know it when I see it".
The contemporary debate over the Supreme Courts role is really about a proper balance between?
Government authority versus individual rights
Which supreme court justice said of the obscenity you know it when you see it?
Potter Stewart, in his concurring opinion in Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 US 184 (1964).For more information, see Related Questions, below.
What is the legal interpretation of obscenity based on?
U.S. obscenity law is based on the Miller Test that was established by the 1973 Supreme Court ruling in Miller v. California. The three parts of the Miller Test are: whether the average person, in an average setting, would find the work sexual in nature; whether the work demonstrates blatantly offensive sexual behavior as defined by law; and whether the work lacks any redeeming value on any level.
What has the author Isidore Starr written?
Isidore Starr has written: 'The Supreme Court and contemporary issues' -- subject(s): United States, United States. Supreme Court 'Living American documents' -- subject(s): History, Sources, United States
Whose rights come first when there is a conflict between an individuals rights and the rights of the community?
There are no "community rights" but individual rights are what is supported. Often the individual rights extents to the community especially when there is a Supreme Court ruling, but it starts with the individual.
