Memoirs V. Massachusetts

Memoirs v.

Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413 (1966), was the United States Supreme Court decision that attempted to clarify a holding regarding obscenity made a decade earlier in Roth v. United States (1957).

Memoirs v. Massachusetts
Memoirs V. Massachusetts
Argued December 7–8, 1965
Decided March 21, 1966
Full case nameA Book Named "John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure", et al. v. Attorney General of Massachusetts
Citations383 U.S. 413 (more)
86 S. Ct. 975; 16 L. Ed. 2d 1; 1966 U.S. LEXIS 2906; 1 Media L. Rep. 1390
Holding
Since the First Amendment forbids censorship of expression of ideas not linked with illegal action, Fanny Hill cannot be proscribed.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Earl Warren
Associate Justices
Hugo Black · William O. Douglas
Tom C. Clark · John M. Harlan II
William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart
Byron White · Abe Fortas
Case opinions
PluralityBrennan, joined by Warren, Fortas
ConcurrenceBlack, joined by Stewart
ConcurrenceDouglas
DissentClark
DissentHarlan
DissentWhite
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I

Since the Roth ruling, to be declared obscene a work of literature had to be proven by censors to: 1) appeal to prurient interest, 2) be patently offensive, and 3) have no redeeming social value. The book in question in this case was Fanny Hill (or Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure, 1749) by John Cleland and the Court held in Memoirs v. Massachusetts that, while it might fit the first two criteria (it appealed to prurient interest and was patently offensive), it could not be proven that Fanny Hill had no redeeming social value. The judgment favoring the plaintiff continued that it could still be held obscene under certain circumstances – for instance, if it were marketed solely for its prurient appeal.

Memoirs v. Massachusetts led to more years of debate about what was and was not obscene and the conferring of more power in these matters to proposers of local community standards.

See also

Further reading

  • Scott, Joseph E.; Eitle, David J.; Skovron, Sandra Evans (1990). "Obscenity and the law: Is it possible for a jury to apply contemporary community standards in determining obscenity?". Law and Human Behavior. 14 (2): 139–150. doi:10.1007/BF01062969. S2CID 145189559.

References



Tags:

Memoirs V. Massachusetts Further readingMemoirs V. Massachusetts

🔥 Trending searches on Wiki English:

Robert LewandowskiVirupaksha (film)Sydney Brown (American football)The Menu (2022 film)Michael OherMary-Kate OlsenNope (film)Sarah SnookXXXSeptember 11 attacksCrystal Palace F.C.2023 ACC Men's Premier CupBella RamseyShah Rukh KhanTamerlan TsarnaevSai PallaviJalen CarterFIBA Basketball World CupJennifer SymeLesley ManvilleWoody HarrelsonAmazon (company)The Ballad of Songbirds and SnakesAndroid (operating system)Ved (film)Bronny JamesBad BunnyJoaquín (footballer, born 1981)World Chess ChampionshipVin DieselBill SkarsgårdMacaulay CulkinLara Flynn BoylePremier LeagueKylian MbappéThe Hunger Games (film)Rufus SewellVladimir PutinOppenheimer (film)Twisted Metal2023 Southeast Asian GamesRDFaMarie AntoinetteElliot GraingeJesusFakhar Zaman (cricketer)Dolly PartonNick KrollWorld Snooker ChampionshipMacOSEverything Everywhere All at OnceDavid BeckhamAlexander SkarsgårdWillie NelsonTom SelleckJames CordenScarlett JohanssonBradley CooperKillers of the Flower Moon (film)The Glory (TV series)ItalyWes AndersonCinco de MayoAberfan disasterJimmy CarterKisi Ka Bhai Kisi Ki JaanThe Mandalorian (season 3)Alexander Isak.xxxMicrosoft WindowsKu Klux KlanShehzada (2023 film)Rachel McAdamsRachael Leigh CookMelanie GriffithMother's DayE. Jean CarrollJesse Plemons🡆 More