Citation network
Miller Vs. California
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 21, 1973
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 15 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U.S. 15 (1973) Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
material in violation of a California statute that approximately incorporated the obscenity test formulated in Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment. Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. DallasSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
it a significant danger of offending the sensibilities of unwilling recipients or of exposure to juveniles. Stanley v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Ginsberg v. NewSearch
-
Redrup v. NewSearch
-
U. S. 184 , 378 U. S. 195 (1964). See Rabe v. WashingtonSearch
-
U. S. 158 , 321 U. S. 169 -170 (1944). Cf. Butler v. MichiganSearch
-
us to focus on two of the landmark cases in the somewhat tortured history of the Court's obscenity decisions. In Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
as utterly without redeeming social importance. . . . This is the same judgment expressed by this Court in Chaplinsky v. NewSearch
-
U.S. at 354 U. S. 48 85 (footnotes omitted). Nine years later, in Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
test had any meaning at all. See Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
United States v. GronerSearch
-
constitutes obscene, pornographic material subject to regulation under the States' police power. See, e.g., Redrup v. NewSearch
-
much has been categorically settled by the Court, that obscene material is unprotected by the First Amendment. Kois v. WisconsinSearch
-
Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 341 U. S. 642 , and cases cited. See Times Film Corp. v. ChicagoSearch
-
to regulate obscene materials must be Page 413 U. S. 24 carefully limited. See Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. DallasSearch
-
would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Kois v. WisconsinSearch
-
supra, at 408 U. S. 230 , quoting Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
test of Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
ultimate power of appellate courts to conduct an independent review of constitutional claims when necessary. See Kois v. WisconsinSearch
-
must have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value to merit First Amendment protection. See Kois v. WisconsinSearch
-
MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, author of the opinions of the Court, or the plurality opinions, in Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
Ginzburg v. UnitedSearch
-
Page 413 U. S. 27 States, 383 U. S. 463 (1966), Mishkin v. NewSearch
-
and Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
distinguish obscene material unprotected by the First Amendment from protected expression, Paris Adult Theatre I v. SlatonSearch
-
fair notice to a dealer in such materials that his public and commercial activities may bring prosecution. See Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Miller v. CaliforniaSearch
-
the First Amendment. Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
Stanley v. GeorgiaSearch
-
See Rabe v. WashingtonSearch
-
Cf. Butler v. MichiganSearch
-
In Roth v. UnitedSearch
-
Chaplinsky v. NewSearch
-
See Memoirs v. MassachusettsSearch
-
the First Amendment. Kois v. WisconsinSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial