New Orleans Book Mart, Inc. v. United States

Background

A group of people were convicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana of transporting allegedly obscene materials across state lines for the purpose of sale under federal law 18 U.S.C. §1465, which criminalizes knowingly moving obscene or indecent items in interstate commerce and prescribes fines and imprisonment. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed those convictions, and the Supreme Court declined to take the case.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the federal statute reaches beyond what the Constitution allows. The Court’s action was simply to deny review, but several Justices disagreed and explained why they would have intervened. Justice Brennan, joined by Justices Stewart and Marshall, said the statute is facially overbroad and unconstitutional and relied on his prior dissenting opinions. He also observed the record did not show that local community standards were used to judge obscenity and said defendants should be allowed to introduce evidence about the legal standard that governed their convictions.

Real world impact

Because the Court denied review, the existing convictions remain in place in this case. The dissenters’ view, however, would have removed the convictions and required a fresh decision or a new trial applying local community standards. The dissent signals a push to limit federal prosecutions under this statute and to give defendants an opportunity to have obscenity judged by local standards.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Douglas separately argued that any state or federal ban or regulation of obscenity is prohibited by the Constitution and would summarily reverse, while Justice Brennan’s opinion, joined by two colleagues, would vacate and remand for possible new trials.