Child pornography

Obscenity and pornography

Further information: United States obscenity law and Pornography in the United States

According to the Supreme Court, the First Amendment's protection of free speech does not necessarily apply to obscene speech.^[162] It first tackled the matter in Roth v. United States (1957), in which it ruled that the First Amendment did not protect obscenity; the same case founded a standard to determine whether the material in question qualifies as obscenity.^[162] Throughout the following decade, members of the Court often reviewed films individually in a court building screening room to determine if they should be considered obscene.^[163] Justice Potter Stewart, in Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964), famously said that, although he could not precisely define pornography, "I know it when I see it."^[164] The so-called Roth test was expanded when the Court decided Miller v. California (1973). Under the *Miller* test, a work is obscene if: "a) 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find the work, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest ... b) the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (c) the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.^[165]

Pornography, except for child pornography, is in practice free of governmental restrictions in the U.S., though pornography about "extreme" sexual practices is occasionally prosecuted.^[27] Child pornography is not subject to the Miller test, as the Supreme Court decided in New York v. Ferber (1982) and Osborne v. Ohio (1990),^[166][167] ruling that the government's interest in protecting children from abuse was paramount.^[168][169] Personal possession of obscene material in the home may not be prohibited by law, as per Stanley v. Georgia (1969).^[162]