Virginia v. American Booksellers Assn., Inc.
Headline: Virginia law banning public display of sexually explicit material is blocked and the Court sends two questions to the state supreme court, affecting booksellers, stores, and access for adults and juveniles.
Holding:
- Keeps enforcement blocked while the Virginia Supreme Court decides the statute's meaning.
- Could force booksellers to segregate or remove titles if state court reads law broadly.
- A narrow interpretation could allow simple supervision, preserving adult access to many books.
Summary
Background
Virginia passed a 1985 amendment making it a crime to knowingly display for commercial purpose materials that depict sexual nudity, sexual conduct, or sadomasochistic abuse and are "harmful to juveniles." National and Virginia booksellers, two Virginia bookstores, and others sued before the law took effect. Plaintiffs offered 16 books as examples and argued the law would force bookstores to create adults-only sections, put books behind counters, stop carrying titles, or bar juveniles, reducing adult access. The District Court found the law might cover 5–25 percent of a typical bookstore's inventory and enjoined enforcement; the Fourth Circuit affirmed.
Reasoning
The Court asked how broadly "harmful to juveniles" applies and whether a store policy of stopping juveniles who browse satisfies the display prohibition. Because lower courts' findings and the State’s competing readings differed, and because the State's attorney appeared to concede loss if certain exhibits were covered, the Court declined to decide the constitutional issues. Instead, it certified two questions to the Virginia Supreme Court asking which, if any, exhibits fall within the statute and what standard accounts for juveniles' differing ages, and whether a bookseller who prevents juveniles from browsing, or who announces such a policy, complies; enforcement remains enjoined.
Real world impact
The questions affect many kinds of booksellers — traditional stores, grocery or drugstore racks, and airport vendors — because compliance options vary by retailer. A narrow state‑court reading could allow simple supervision of a single shelf; a broad reading could force costly segregation, lost inventory, and reduced adult access to some works. The Supreme Court's certification delays a final federal ruling until the state court answers.
Dissents or concurrances
Justice Stevens agreed with much of the Court's approach but would have asked the state court specifically which exhibits, if any, the statute covers to better clarify its reach.
Opinions in this case:
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?