Osborne v. Ohio
Encyclopedia
Osborne v. Ohio, , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
held that the First Amendment allows states to outlaw the mere possession, as distinct from the distribution, of child pornography. In so doing, the Court extended the holding of New York v. Ferber
, , which had upheld laws banning the distribution of child pornography
against a similar First Amendment
challenge, and distinguished Stanley v. Georgia
, , which had struck down a Georgia
law forbidding the possession of pornography
by adults in their own homes. The Court also determined that the Ohio
law at issue was not overbroad, relying on a narrowing interpretation of the law the Ohio Supreme Court had adopted in prior proceedings in the case. However, because it was unclear whether the State had proved all the elements of the crime
, the Court ordered a new trial.
With respect to child pornography, however, the government
does not act out of a "paternalistic interest" in regulating a citizen's mind. By outlawing the possession of child pornography, the government seeks to eradicate legitimate harms by diminishing the market
for child pornography. These harms include the psychological damage to children -- both the children depicted in the pornography, for whom the images produced serve as a permanent record of the abuse, and the children whom potential abusers might lure with such images. "Given the importance of the State's interest in protecting the victims of child pornography, we cannot fault Ohio for attempting to stamp out this vice at all levels in the distribution chain."
Even if the First Amendment did not categorically forbid the government to ban the possession of child pornography, Osborne argued that the Ohio statute under which he was convicted was overbroad. A ban on speech is "overbroad" if it outlaws both prohibited speech as well as a substantial amount of legitimate speech. The statute, as written, banned depictions of nudity, and the Court had previously held that nudity was protected expression. But the Ohio Supreme Court had held that the statute only applied to nudity that "constitutes a lewd exhibition or involves a graphic focus on the genitals, and where the person depicted is neither the child nor the ward of the person charged" with violating it. Furthermore, the Ohio Supreme Court had required that the defendant had to know that the images depicted children before being convicted of possession of child pornography. By narrowing the scope of the statute in these ways, the Ohio Supreme Court had sufficiently tailored the law only to those images most harmful to children.
However, the Court reversed Osborne's conviction because, after reviewing the record of the trial, it observed that the State did not present evidence that the images were "lewd" within the meaning of the statute. Because lewdness was an essential element of the crime, the State had not satisfied its obligation to prove all the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
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...
held that the First Amendment allows states to outlaw the mere possession, as distinct from the distribution, of child pornography. In so doing, the Court extended the holding of New York v. Ferber
New York v. Ferber
New York v. Ferber, , was a United States Supreme Court decision. The Court ruled unanimously that the First Amendment right to free speech did not forbid states from banning the sale of material depicting children engaged in sexual activity....
, , which had upheld laws banning the distribution of child pornography
Child pornography
Child pornography refers to images or films and, in some cases, writings depicting sexually explicit activities involving a child...
against a similar 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...
challenge, and distinguished Stanley v. Georgia
Stanley v. Georgia
Stanley v. Georgia, , was a United States Supreme Court decision that helped to establish an implied "right to privacy" in U.S. law.The Georgia home of Robert Eli Stanley, a suspected and previously convicted bookmaker, was searched by police with a federal warrant to seize betting paraphernalia...
, , which had struck down a Georgia
Georgia (U.S. state)
Georgia is a state located in the southeastern United States. It was established in 1732, the last of the original Thirteen Colonies. The state is named after King George II of Great Britain. Georgia was the fourth state to ratify the United States Constitution, on January 2, 1788...
law forbidding the possession of pornography
Pornography
Pornography or porn is the explicit portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purposes of sexual arousal and erotic satisfaction.Pornography may use any of a variety of media, ranging from books, magazines, postcards, photos, sculpture, drawing, painting, animation, sound recording, film, video,...
by adults in their own homes. The Court also determined that the Ohio
Ohio
Ohio is a Midwestern state in the United States. The 34th largest state by area in the U.S.,it is the 7th‑most populous with over 11.5 million residents, containing several major American cities and seven metropolitan areas with populations of 500,000 or more.The state's capital is Columbus...
law at issue was not overbroad, relying on a narrowing interpretation of the law the Ohio Supreme Court had adopted in prior proceedings in the case. However, because it was unclear whether the State had proved all the elements of the crime
Crime
Crime is the breach of rules or laws for which some governing authority can ultimately prescribe a conviction...
, the Court ordered a new trial.
With respect to child pornography, however, the government
Government
Government refers to the legislators, administrators, and arbitrators in the administrative bureaucracy who control a state at a given time, and to the system of government by which they are organized...
does not act out of a "paternalistic interest" in regulating a citizen's mind. By outlawing the possession of child pornography, the government seeks to eradicate legitimate harms by diminishing the market
Market
A market is one of many varieties of systems, institutions, procedures, social relations and infrastructures whereby parties engage in exchange. While parties may exchange goods and services by barter, most markets rely on sellers offering their goods or services in exchange for money from buyers...
for child pornography. These harms include the psychological damage to children -- both the children depicted in the pornography, for whom the images produced serve as a permanent record of the abuse, and the children whom potential abusers might lure with such images. "Given the importance of the State's interest in protecting the victims of child pornography, we cannot fault Ohio for attempting to stamp out this vice at all levels in the distribution chain."
Even if the First Amendment did not categorically forbid the government to ban the possession of child pornography, Osborne argued that the Ohio statute under which he was convicted was overbroad. A ban on speech is "overbroad" if it outlaws both prohibited speech as well as a substantial amount of legitimate speech. The statute, as written, banned depictions of nudity, and the Court had previously held that nudity was protected expression. But the Ohio Supreme Court had held that the statute only applied to nudity that "constitutes a lewd exhibition or involves a graphic focus on the genitals, and where the person depicted is neither the child nor the ward of the person charged" with violating it. Furthermore, the Ohio Supreme Court had required that the defendant had to know that the images depicted children before being convicted of possession of child pornography. By narrowing the scope of the statute in these ways, the Ohio Supreme Court had sufficiently tailored the law only to those images most harmful to children.
However, the Court reversed Osborne's conviction because, after reviewing the record of the trial, it observed that the State did not present evidence that the images were "lewd" within the meaning of the statute. Because lewdness was an essential element of the crime, the State had not satisfied its obligation to prove all the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
See also
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 495
- List of United States Supreme Court cases
- Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume
- List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Rehnquist Court