Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
DegradationWhat the History of Obscenity Tells Us about Hate Speech$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Kevin W. Saunders

Print publication date: 2011

Print ISBN-13: 9780814741443

Published to NYU Press Scholarship Online: March 2016

DOI: 10.18574/nyu/9780814741443.001.0001

Show Summary Details

Using Obscenity Doctrine to Address Hate Speech

Using Obscenity Doctrine to Address Hate Speech

Chapter:
(p.123) 7 Using Obscenity Doctrine to Address Hate Speech
Source:
Degradation
Author(s):

Kevin W. Saunders

Publisher:
NYU Press
DOI:10.18574/nyu/9780814741443.003.0007

This chapter examines the use of obscenity doctrine to address hate speech. It first considers the U.S. test currently used for obscenity, set forth by the Supreme Court in the 1973 case Miller v. California, along with criticisms against the Miller test. It then discusses the three prongs of the Miller test in order to adapt it to hate speech: appeal to the prurient interest; patent offensiveness and statutory definition; and a material's lack of serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. It also explores the Supreme Court's ruling in the 1974 case Hamling v. United States, in which it tackled the mental state required for a person to be guilty of a violation of obscenity laws.

Keywords:   obscenity doctrine, hate speech, obscenity, Supreme Court, Miller v. California, Miller test, prurient interest, offensiveness, Hamling v. United States, obscenity laws

NYU Press Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.