Study Notes- Constitutional Law

California d had fuck the draft on his jacket the

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: e average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest (shameful or morbid interest in sex) i. The work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way (as determined by applying community standards), sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law. ii. The work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value Miller v. California – D was convicted for mailing obscene material. The issue was whether this was obscene. The court applied the above test for the first time. Before the test was if it lacked any social value it was obscene. Cohen v. California – "Fuck the draft". The court held this not to be obscene because it does not stir up sexual matters or stimulation. American Book Sellers Ass’n v. Hudnut – law prohibited all pornography of women. The court struck down the law since it did not talk about community standards, or whether the "speech" lacked any literary, social, etc. value. 1. Taunts, verbal abuse, and intense provocation a. Fighting words – Unprotected in part because of their low value, and in part because of the important government interests in protecting the listener and preserving the peace. i. Defined – expression that by its very utterance inflicts injury or tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace; Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire – Jehovah’s witness was arrested for saying "things" to the sheriff. The court held that if t...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online