It’s not a 1A issue, though. The government isn’t restricting your ability to purchase or own the book, they’re just saying it can’t be used in schools.
Comment on How are Book Bans Constitutional?
radix@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Bans often rely on the obscenity exception to the 1st Amendment:
…findlaw.com/…/first-amendment-limits--obscenity.…
SCOTUS has never given a clear, well-defined, repeatable test to say exactly what “obscenity” even means, so local jurisdictions are free to push the envelope.
If that sounds like a pile of bullshit waiting to be exploited, yes, and that’s exactly why we’re seeing this happening.
pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 3 months ago
fubbernuckin@lemmy.world 3 months ago
I wish there was no obscenity exception. I think all media deserves to exist regardless of its obscenity as long as it’s not directly harming someone (like certain types of porn for instance)
Kimano@lemmy.world 3 months ago
The problem is the obscenity exception is also used for things like preventing someone from walking around a public park with a giant sign covered in gore porn. Something like that I think is obviously pretty okay to ban, but clearly it gets misused for a lot of homophobic/transphobic type stuff.
humorlessrepost@lemmy.world 3 months ago
walking around a public park with a giant sign covered in gore porn
anti-abortion protesters have entered the chat
Just need to have a case for it being a political statement.
pineapplelover@lemm.ee 3 months ago
Anybody push back? Saying lgbt and civil rights stuff is not “obscenity”?
TheSpermWhale@lemmy.world 3 months ago
You try arguing with idiots
JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 3 months ago
You should instead be trying to get rid of the ‘obscenity’ exception itself, not just work around it.