ShmoopTube

00:00

Thank you We sneak And here's your shmoop too sure

00:05

brought to you by the freedom of speech the constitutional

00:08

right to question authority in which case to the supreme

00:12

court hold that obscenity was not protected by the first

00:15

amendment and hear the potential answers case right already We

00:20

know we know another question about supreme court but look

00:23

there's no need to get all obscene about it All

00:25

right Did the supreme court hold that's Insanity was not

00:28

protected by the first amendment in a texas v johnson

00:32

Quite the opposite Actually some people might think that burning

00:34

a flag is pretty obscene in the eyes of uncle

00:37

sam But supreme court ruled that individuals could wave They're

00:39

desecrating desires all over town that reduces eight ashes Was

00:44

the constitutionality of obscenity dealt within Be tinker v des

00:47

moines Well there was a world where students were so

00:50

upset with the teachers punishment that they took it all

00:53

the way to the supreme court and won huh Really

00:56

soundly Fairy tale Well it's Not as the tots from

00:59

tinker v des moines could tell you After being suspended

01:02

for wearing black armbands in protest of the vietnam war

01:06

the students fought back And emerged victorious since the supreme

01:08

court ruled that students had constitutional protections within the schoolhouse

01:12

walls as well Talk about dressing for success in all

01:16

right if the supreme court deal with obscenity in c

01:18

brandenburg v ohio well kind of if one things that

01:21

given a speech railing against african americans and jews and

01:24

anyone who supports them is obscene Brandenburg was ku klux

01:27

klan leader in rural ohio and after giving a pretty

01:30

offensive speach the police arrested him for being well a

01:33

pretty awful guy But because brandenburg was pretty abstract about

01:37

getting people to commit violence in the name of his

01:39

hateful words the supreme court ruled he was free to

01:42

say whatever he wanted Don't blame us We're just constitutionally

01:45

protected messenger Yeah What about d boys Katz v dale

01:50

Well boy scouts retail dealt with the right to exclude

01:52

Specifically the boy scouts of america is ban on admitting

01:55

homosexual members but we're looking for a case dealing with

01:59

obscene content not obscene acts of discrimination which means the

02:03

supreme court held that obscenity was not protected by the

02:05

first amendment in e roth v united states Rafi us

02:09

was the court's first Attempt to deal with the issue

02:11

of obscenity and whether it was protected under the first

02:13

amendment guarantee of free speech The court decided that ideas

02:17

even those with the slightest redeeming social importance should be

02:21

protected Obscene content on the other hand was not protected

02:25

since it was utterly without redeeming social importance So is

02:29

that correct answer Curiously left out of the first amendment 00:02:33.315 --> [endTime] right to free speech Oh

Full Transcript