NCJ Number
12923
Journal
Loyola Law Review Volume: 20 Issue: 1 Dated: (1974) Pages: 159-175
Date Published
1974
Length
17 pages
Annotation
RECENT SUPREME COURT DECISION, WHILE CLARIFYING PRIOR HOLDINGS OF THE COURT TO A DEGREE, FAILS TO ELIMINATE ALL PROBLEMS FROM THIS TROUBLESOME AREA OF THE LAW.
Abstract
THE VAST AMOUNT OF LITIGATION SPAWNED BY THE 1957 ROTH V. UNITED STATES DECISION WAS A RESULT OF ITS BROAD AND AMBIGUOUS FORMULA FOR OBSCENITY. SINCE THE 1973 MILLER V. CALIFORNIA STANDARD IS MERELY A MODIFICATION OF ROTH, VIEWING IT AS A BROADER TEST IS TO IGNORE THE COURT'S AWARENESS OF THESE PROBLEMS. THE MODIFIED STANDARDS SEEM TO HAVE THREE BASIC OBJECTIVES - (1) TO RESTRICT THE DENIAL OF FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION TO A VERY SMALL CLASS OF HARD-CORE PORNOGRAPHY, (2) TO REDUCE THE PROSECUTION'S BURDEN OF PROOF WITH RESPECT TO MATERIAL CLEARLY WITHIN THIS CLASS, AND (3) ONCE MATERIAL IS CLASSIFIED PORNOGRAPHIC, BROADEN GOVERNMENTAL POWER TO REGULATE AND CONTROL IT. THE AUTHOR FEELS THAT MILLER DID NOT COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THE VAGUENESS IN DEFINING OBSCENITY AND THAT THE ONLY WAY THIS VAGUENESS MIGHT BE ELIMINATED IS TO RADICALLY DEPART FROM THE ROTH-MILLER APPROACH. INCLUDED IS A REVIEW OF OBSCENITY DECISIONS IN THE SUPREME COURT.