- What this test should/does protect has become slightly more confusing in the recent past
Miller Test For Obscenity
Sources
- Oluwole, Joseph/Green, Preston, Censorship and Student Communication in Online and Offline Settings. IG Global, 2015 (page 87)
- Nowlin, Christopher, Judging Obscenity: A Critical History of Expert Evidence. McGill-Queen's Press, 2003 (pages 76-79)
- Lively, Donald/Weaver, Russel, Contemporary Supreme Court Cases: Landmark Decisions Since Roe V. Wade. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006 (pages 82-84)
The Test
Impact
New ideas and controversies about what gives art value; what makes "good art"
Background
- Set an important precedent
- No good defnition by which court cases were being judged
- Let people know what they could and could not be prosecuted for
To judge future cases, the Miller Test for Obscenity was developed with three prongs asking:
In short: Many people do not like the idea of it being up ot judeges in court to decide what is art versus what is nothing more than an obscenity
- Supreme Court under Scrutiny
- Miller v. California (1973)
The Court Case
The Court Case- Result
- Marvin Miller versus the state of California
General disagreement about whether pornogrphic acting is a feminist act or degrades women and appeals to the aforementioned "prurient interest"
- The case resulted in a definable standard or test by which all future obscenity cases should be judged called the Miller Test for Obscenity
- Miller was convicted for mailing advertisements showing men and women in many sexually explicit positions
2) "whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law."
1) "whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest."
- Main issue- How little social value does a material have to have to be found obscene
- patently offensive- clearly or obviously offensive
- may vary based on location
- prurient interest as oppsed to curious interest
3) "whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."
The Court Case- Ruling
- In favor of the state of California
- Charges were based on previous California laws regarding prohibition of some obscene content