Legal Opinion
United States v. Various Articles of Obscene Merchandise
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 25, 1976No. 75 Civ. 4691PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FRANKEL, District Judge.
For 135 years, Congress has forbidden penetration of our shores by obscene materials. 1 The enactment currently performing that protective function is § 305 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. § 1305(a) (1970). 2 Customs personnel at our various ports staff this bulwark. They spend their time opening mail and packages, having evidently learned what to suspect. Materials believed to be of the forbidden kind are turned over to the United States Attorney for the district in which the port lies.
In this district, the Customs Service makes a weekly bundle of the…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Roth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Hamling v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Stanley v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Speiser v. RandallSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. John S. LangfordCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
- United States v. Various Articles of Obscene Merchandise, Schedule No. 1769Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
- United States v. Gerald L. BlucherCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1978
- Cherry v. Secretary of the Treasury of the United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1978
- United States v. John S. LangfordCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982