Roth v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brennan
The constitutionality of a criminal obscenity statute is the question in each of these cases. In Roth, the primary constitutional question is whether the federal obscenity statute 1 violates the provision of the First Amendment that “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . . .” In Alberts, the primary constitutional question is whether the obscenity provisions of the California Penal Code 2 invade the freedoms of speech and press as they may be incorporated in *480the liberty protected from state action by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth…
2Cases cited69 opinions
- Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Thornhill v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Prince v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- United States v. HarrissSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Near v. Minnesota Ex Rel. OlsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3,180 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Connick Ex Rel. Parish of Orleans v. MyersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
3,175 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.