Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan

1963-02-18

Headline: Rhode Island’s youth morality commission’s informal blacklisting is struck down as unconstitutional, blocking its practice of pressuring distributors and suppressing sale and circulation of books and magazines.

Holding: The Court held that the state commission’s practice of notifying distributors and police to remove listed publications amounted to state-sponsored informal censorship and violated the Fourteenth Amendment, so the practice must cease.

Real World Impact:

Stops state commissions from informal blacklists that pressure distributors to remove books.
Protects publishers and distributors from state-created coercion that suppresses sales without judicial process.
Keeps adults’ access intact by barring wholesale suppression targeted at youth from removing materials for everyone.

Topics: book censorship, obscenity rules, freedom of the press, state commissions

Summary

Background

Four New York paperback publishers and their Rhode Island distributor sued to stop a state-created “Commission to Encourage Morality in Youth.” The Commission sent official notices listing books and magazines it had declared “objectionable” and circulated those lists to local police. The distributor testified he stopped filling orders, pulled unsold copies from retailers, and returned them to publishers after receiving notices. State courts split: trial court enjoined the Commission’s practices, the Rhode Island Supreme Court reversed that injunction, and the publishers appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether the Commission’s informal practice of blacklisting publications could stand. The Justices found the notices were state action that in practice coerced distributors and suppressed circulation without any judicial findings, hearings, or review. The Court relied on the lack of safeguards, the vague statutory mandate, and the Attorney General’s concession that some listed works were not obscene. Because the system operated as a prior administrative restraint and bypassed criminal-procedure protections, the Court held the practice violated the Fourteenth Amendment and reversed the state court’s decision.

Real world impact

The ruling stops this kind of state-run informal blacklist in Rhode Island on this record and protects publishers, distributors, and adult readers from summary suppression without judicial process. The decision leaves open that genuine, noncoercive consultations between law enforcement and distributors may be lawful, but it requires that any suppression of material follow ordinary legal safeguards. The case was reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Douglas stressed that administrative censorship is incompatible with the First Amendment. Justice Clark agreed with the judgment but warned the Court gave few practical rules. Justice Harlan dissented, arguing the Commission should be allowed to combat juvenile delinquency and publishers should use normal court remedies.