Jacobellis v. Ohio
Encyclopedia
Jacobellis v. Ohio, , was a United States Supreme Court
decision handed down in 1964 involving whether the state of Ohio could, consistent with the First Amendment
, ban the showing of a French film called The Lovers (Les Amants) which the state had deemed obscene
.
Nico Jacobellis, manager of the Heights Art Theatre in the Coventry Village neighborhood of Cleveland Heights, Ohio
, was convicted and fined $2500 by a judge of the Cuyahoga County
Court of Common Pleas
for exhibiting the film, and his conviction was upheld by the Supreme Court of Ohio
.
The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the conviction, ruling that the film was not obscene and hence constitutionally protected. However, the Court could not agree as to a rationale, yielding four different opinions from the majority, with none garnering the support of more than two justices, as well as two dissenting opinions. The judgment of the Court was announced by William J. Brennan, but his opinion was joined only by Justice Arthur Goldberg
.
Justice Hugo Black
, joined by Justice William O. Douglas
, reiterated his well-known view that the First Amendment does not permit censorship of any kind. Chief Justice Earl Warren
, in dissent, decried the confused state of the Court's obscenity jurisprudence and argued that Ohio's action was consistent with the Court's decision in Roth v. United States
and furthered important state interests. Justice John Marshall Harlan II
also dissented, believing that states should have "wide, but not federally unrestricted" power to ban obscene films.
The most famous opinion from Jacobellis, however, was Justice Potter Stewart
's concurrence, holding that the Constitution protected all obscenity except "hard-core pornography." Stewart wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it
, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that." (emphasis added)
The Court's obscenity jurisprudence would remain fragmented until 1973's Miller v. California
.
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
decision handed down in 1964 involving whether the state of Ohio could, consistent with the First Amendment
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering...
, ban the showing of a French film called The Lovers (Les Amants) which the state had deemed obscene
Obscenity
An obscenity is any statement or act which strongly offends the prevalent morality of the time, is a profanity, or is otherwise taboo, indecent, abhorrent, or disgusting, or is especially inauspicious...
.
Nico Jacobellis, manager of the Heights Art Theatre in the Coventry Village neighborhood of Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Cleveland Heights is a city in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, United States, a suburb of Cleveland. The city's population was 46,121 at the 2010 census.-Geography:Cleveland Heights is located at ....
, was convicted and fined $2500 by a judge of the Cuyahoga County
Cuyahoga County, Ohio
Cuyahoga County is a county located in the state of Ohio, United States. It is the most populous county in Ohio; as of the 2010 census, the population was 1,280,122. Its county seat is Cleveland. Cuyahoga County is part of Greater Cleveland, a metropolitan area, and Northeast Ohio, a...
Court of Common Pleas
Ohio Courts of Common Pleas
The Ohio Courts of Common Pleas are the trial courts of the state court system of Ohio.The courts of common pleas are the trial courts of general jurisdiction in the state. They are the only trial courts created by the Ohio Constitution . The duties of the courts are outlined in Article IV, Section...
for exhibiting the film, and his conviction was upheld by the Supreme Court of Ohio
Supreme Court of Ohio
The Supreme Court of Ohio is the highest court in the U.S. state of Ohio, with final authority over interpretations of Ohio law and the Ohio Constitution. The court has seven members, a chief justice and six associate justices, each serving six-year terms...
.
The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the conviction, ruling that the film was not obscene and hence constitutionally protected. However, the Court could not agree as to a rationale, yielding four different opinions from the majority, with none garnering the support of more than two justices, as well as two dissenting opinions. The judgment of the Court was announced by William J. Brennan, but his opinion was joined only by Justice Arthur Goldberg
Arthur Goldberg
Arthur Joseph Goldberg was an American statesman and jurist who served as the U.S. Secretary of Labor, Supreme Court Justice and Ambassador to the United Nations.-Early life:...
.
Justice Hugo Black
Hugo Black
Hugo Lafayette Black was an American politician and jurist. A member of the Democratic Party, Black represented Alabama in the United States Senate from 1927 to 1937, and served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1937 to 1971. Black was nominated to the Supreme...
, joined by Justice William O. Douglas
William O. Douglas
William Orville Douglas was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. With a term lasting 36 years and 209 days, he is the longest-serving justice in the history of the Supreme Court...
, reiterated his well-known view that the First Amendment does not permit censorship of any kind. Chief Justice Earl Warren
Earl Warren
Earl Warren was the 14th Chief Justice of the United States.He is known for the sweeping decisions of the Warren Court, which ended school segregation and transformed many areas of American law, especially regarding the rights of the accused, ending public-school-sponsored prayer, and requiring...
, in dissent, decried the confused state of the Court's obscenity jurisprudence and argued that Ohio's action was consistent with the Court's decision in Roth v. United States
Roth v. United States
Roth v. United States, , along with its companion case, Alberts v. California, was a landmark case before the United States Supreme Court which redefined the Constitutional test for determining what constitutes obscene material unprotected by the First Amendment.- Prior history :Under the common...
and furthered important state interests. Justice John Marshall Harlan II
John Marshall Harlan II
John Marshall Harlan was an American jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court from 1955 to 1971. His namesake was his grandfather John Marshall Harlan, another associate justice who served from 1877 to 1911.Harlan was a student at Upper Canada College and Appleby College and...
also dissented, believing that states should have "wide, but not federally unrestricted" power to ban obscene films.
The most famous opinion from Jacobellis, however, was Justice Potter Stewart
Potter Stewart
Potter Stewart was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. During his tenure, he made, among other areas, major contributions to criminal justice reform, civil rights, access to the courts, and Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.-Education:Stewart was born in Jackson, Michigan,...
's concurrence, holding that the Constitution protected all obscenity except "hard-core pornography." Stewart wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it
I know it when I see it
The phrase "I know it when I see it" is a colloquial expression within the United States by which a speaker attempts to categorize an observable fact or event, although the category is subjective or lacks clearly defined parameters. The phrase was famously used by United States Supreme Court...
, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that." (emphasis added)
The Court's obscenity jurisprudence would remain fragmented until 1973's Miller v. California
Miller v. California
Miller v. California, was an important United States Supreme Court case involving what constitutes unprotected obscenity for First Amendment purposes...
.
See also
- Elephant testElephant testThe term elephant test refers to situations in which an idea or thing "is hard to describe, but instantly recognizable when spotted".- Uses :...
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 378
- I know it when I see itI know it when I see itThe phrase "I know it when I see it" is a colloquial expression within the United States by which a speaker attempts to categorize an observable fact or event, although the category is subjective or lacks clearly defined parameters. The phrase was famously used by United States Supreme Court...