Cain v. Kentucky

Background

A group of people who showed a film in public in Kentucky were convicted under the State’s ban on that showing, and they appealed to the Supreme Court after the Kentucky courts ruled against them. The case reached the high court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals of Kentucky, and the written record notes counsel for both sides.

Reasoning

The core question was whether Kentucky could bar public showings of this film. The Court issued a short per curiam decision reversing the conviction, relying on the Court’s controlling approach set out in Redrup v. New York. In plain terms, the Court concluded the State’s ban could not be sustained under the rule the Court applied, so the people who had been convicted won in this appeal.

Real world impact

The reversal prevents Kentucky from enforcing its conviction in this case and shows the Court applying Redrup’s standard to limit a State’s power to punish public film showings judged obscene. Practically, this decision makes it harder for this State to uphold similar public-showing bans under the same rule.

Dissents or concurrances

Two Justices dissented. Chief Justice Burger said States should be free to set their own obscenity standards and would have affirmed. Justice Harlan called this a borderline suppression of the film but also would have affirmed, saying he could not conclude Kentucky exceeded constitutional limits.