
in support of free expression
The information presented here by the National
Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) may be freely redistributed in its entirety,
provided that readers are informed that the information was obtained from
NCAC's World Wide Web site and that credit is given to the appropriate source
of whatever information is used. Permission is expressly granted for the information
obtained to be made available for file transfer from installations offering
unrestricted anonymous file transfer on the Internet. Information found here
may not be sold for profit or incorporated in commercial documents without
the written permission from the National Coalition Against Censorship.
©Copyright 2005 NCAC
WEB DESIGN
Jeanne Criscola Criscola Design
free speech first amendment censorship
|
|
| |
|
 |
Paperback
book publisher Bantam Books, Inc. filed a suit asking
the Court to declare as unconstitutional Rhode Island’s
law creating the Commission to Encourage Morality
in Youth. In performance of its duties, the Commission
suppressed circulation of certain “objectionable”
publications in many parts of Rhode Island for their
alleged obscenity,
indecency, or impure language. The Commission was
not subject to judicial oversight before it issued
notices of its obscenity finding to book distributors;
nor was judicial review of the Commission’s
determinations provided. Furthermore, the book publishers
or distributors were not entitled to notice or hearing
before their publications were listed as objectionable
by the Commission.
The Court found that, though obscenity is not a
form of protected speech,
the state still must provide adequate safeguards
to ensure that constitutionally protected expression
is not incidentally censored in the regulation of
obscenity. The Commission did not provide such safeguards,
and it thus imposed a system of prior
restraint on material that had not yet been
and perhaps may never have been characterized as
obscene in a judicial proceeding. Any system of
prior restraint bears a presumption of unconstitutionality,
and the Court noted that it had only allowed prior
restraint where it operated under judicial superintendence
and assured an almost immediate judicial determination
of the validity of the restraint. The system imposed
by Rhode Island did not do so. Additionally, the
Court found the system overbroad
in effect, as it completely suppressed the listed
publications and deprived adults as well as children
of the opportunity to purchase the publications
in the state. The Court found this system of censorship
unconstitutional, and it struck down the statute
creating the Commission. |
|
| These
materials are not intended, and should not be used, as
legal advice. They necessarily contain generalizations
that are not applicable in all jurisdictions or circumstances.
Moreover, court decisions may be superceded by subsequent
rulings, and may be subject to alternative interpretations.
Corrections, clarification, and additions are welcome.
Please send to ncac@ncac.org. |
|
Action Alerts
» National
» Eastern
» Central
» Mountain
» Pacific
» email alert sign-up
» report censorship!
|