Summary

Thurgood Marshall United States v. Reidel — Dissent

The Court did, however, approve the validity or regulatory action taken to protect children and unwilling adults from exposure to materials deemed to be obscene. The need for such protection of course arises when obscenity is distributed or displayed publicly; and the Court reaffirmed the principles of Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 77 S.Ct. 1304, 1 L.Ed.2d 1498 (1957) , Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767 (1967) , and other decisions that involved the commercial distribution of obscene materials.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature