Randall Book Corp. v. Maryland

Background

A Maryland company was charged under a state law that makes it a misdemeanor to display for advertising pictures or images that depict sadomasochistic abuse, sexual conduct, or sexual excitement. A trial court dismissed the charges as vague and overly broad. The Maryland Court of Special Appeals reversed that dismissal, relying on a state case that limited the statute to cover only “obscene” material.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the company could be tried under the Maryland advertising ban without violating the Constitution’s protections for expression. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case, so it left the appeals court’s decision intact and did not rule on the law’s constitutionality. Justice Brennan, joined by Justice Marshall, dissented and said he would have granted review because he believes the statute is unconstitutional on its face even with the state court’s narrowing.

Real world impact

Because the Supreme Court refused review, the Maryland ruling stands and prosecutors may proceed against advertisers who display the covered images. The decision is not a final Supreme Court judgment on whether such a statute is constitutional; the national Court did not resolve the underlying free-speech question, so that issue could surface again in future cases.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Brennan’s dissent explains he would vacate the appeals court’s judgment and reinstate the dismissal, arguing a criminal trial under this statute would violate free-speech protections.