Womack Et Al. v. United States

Background

Two petitioners — an individual and a newspaper company — were convicted in federal court in Washington, D.C., for mailing obscene material and for transporting it in interstate commerce under federal criminal laws (18 U.S.C. §1461 and §1462). The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed those convictions, and the petitioners asked the Supreme Court to review that ruling.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court declined to hear the case, so the appeals court’s decision stands and the convictions remain in effect. The denial was procedural; the Court did not rule on the constitutionality of the statutes in this opinion. Several Justices dissented, arguing the federal statute is too broad and that the petitioners were entitled to stronger procedural protections about the legal standard used to judge obscenity.

Real world impact

The practical result is that the convictions affirmed by the D.C. Circuit remain valid and enforceable while no further Supreme Court review is granted. Because the high Court did not decide the underlying legal questions, the legality of the federal mailing and transportation bans on obscene material could be raised again in later proceedings. Four Justices expressed that the case should have been taken and the convictions overturned.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Brennan (joined by Justices Stewart and Marshall) would have granted review and reversed, calling the statute overbroad and noting the lack of reliance on local community standards; Justice Douglas would have summarily reversed, believing bans on obscenity unconstitutional.