Obscenity law

Obscenity law regulates the publication or distribution of material judged legally obscene, often on grounds of sexual explicitness or moral offense. Its definitions and enforcement vary across jurisdictions and change over time.

Miller test: A three-part United States Supreme Court test for determining whether material is legally obscene. It supplies the current constitutional framework for most obscenity prosecutions in the United States.
Regina v. Hicklin: An 1868 English court decision that defined obscenity through the effect of material on susceptible readers. Its broad test influenced obscenity prosecutions in Britain and the United States.
Freedom of speech: The right to express ideas without unjustified government restriction. Obscenity is a narrow category of expression excluded from First Amendment protection in the United States.
Chilling effect: The deterrence of lawful expression caused by fear of legal or other penalties. Unclear obscenity boundaries can discourage publishers from distributing borderline works.
Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union: A United States Supreme Court case that struck down key provisions of the Child Online Protection Act. The decision shows how courts assess online restrictions against less restrictive alternatives.
Community standards: Locally grounded norms used in law to assess whether material is offensive or acceptable. The Miller test makes local standards relevant to judging offensiveness and appeal.
Comstock laws: Nineteenth-century United States statutes restricting the mailing of contraceptive information and materials deemed obscene. They institutionalized federal suppression of sexual material through postal regulation.
Indecency: Expression involving sexual or excretory material that may be restricted in particular contexts without being legally obscene. Indecency can receive constitutional protection that obscenity does not.
Indecent Publications Act 1959: A United Kingdom statute permitting a public-good defense for works of literary merit accused of obscenity. It illustrates how statutory reform can temper censorship while retaining obscenity offenses.
Child Online Protection Act: A United States federal law that sought to restrict minors' access to online material deemed harmful. Its litigation exposed the difficulty of applying community standards to globally accessible websites.

Linked from 9 pages