Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1963 to 1972

Memoirs v. Massachusetts - Lower Court Found Fanny Hill Obscene, Justice Douglas Noted Definition Of Obscene Objective, Dissenting Justices Find Differing Conclusions

book william john supreme

Petitioner

A Book Named "John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure," G. P. Putnam's Sons

Respondent

William I. Covin, Assistant Attorney General of Massachusetts

Petitioner's Claim

That the book John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure, better known as Fanny Hill, was entitled to protection under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court erred when it found that a book which appealed to the prurient interest was not required to be completely worthless to be ruled obscene.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Charles Rembar

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

William I. Cowin

Justices for the Court

Hugo Lafayette Black, William J. Brennan, Jr. (writing for the Court), William O. Douglas, Abe Fortas, Potter Stewart, Earl Warren.

Justices Dissenting

Tom C. Clark, John Marshall Harlan II, Byron R. White

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

21 March 1966

Decision

The Supreme Court found that the book was not obscene, and that the First and Fourteenth Amendments prevented Massachusetts from prohibiting its publication or distribution. However, the justices did not agree on why the book constituted protected speech, and no majority opinion was delivered.

Significance

The case added to the debate among First Amendment scholars concerning definitions of obscenity and the authority to deem printed materials as works without merit.

Related Cases

  • Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
  • Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463 (1966).
  • Mishkin v. New York, 383 U.S. 502 (1966).

Sources

Foerstel, Herbert N. Banned in the U.S.A: A Reference Guide to Book Censorship in Schools and Public Libraries. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1994.

Further Readings

  • Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt, eds. Congressional Quarterly's Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1996.
  • Johnson, John W., ed. Historic U.S. Court Cases, 1690-1990: An Encyclopedia. New York: Garland Publishing, 1992.
  • Konvitz, Milton R., ed. Bill of Rights Reader, 5th ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1973.
  • Time, April 1, 1966.
Miranda v. Arizona - Further Readings [next] [back] McKeiver v. Pennsylvania - Significance, The Due Process Clause, The Rehabilitation Of Youthful Offenders, Courts Granting More Rights

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or