Significance: In this case the Supreme Court judged that the First Amendment right to free speech and freedom of the press did not apply to obscenity. This ruling also held that material cannot have any ideas of social value to be declared obscene.
Background: Roth, a New York publisher and seller of books, magazines, and photographs containing graphic sexual content, promoted his business by sending advertisements in the mail. This was in violation of a federal obscenity law, and Roth was convicted by a jury in a federal district court.
Decision: This case was argued on April 22, 1957, and decided on June 24, 1957, by a vote of 6 to 3. Justice William Brennan spoke for the Court, with Justices William Douglas, Hugo Black, and John Harlan in dissent. The Court upheld Roth’s conviction. It ruled that the First Amendment did not protect obscene materials because they had no redeeming social importance. To protect important literary works and other material of social value, however, the Court ruled that the test of obscenity must ensure that only material that did not convey important ideas could be judged obscene.
