RAY
v.
OHIO
RAY
OHIO
364 U.S. 476
Supreme Court of the United States (1960)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.
The motion for leave to supplement the jurisdictional statement is granted. The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (U.S. 1973)…ances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality." Roth v. United States, 364 U. S. 476, 485 (1957), quoting Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U. S. 568, 572 (1942) (emphasis added in Roth). The protection afforded by Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U. S. 557 (1969), is restricted to a place, the home. In contrast, the constitutionally protect…
-
J.D. Martin v. Jess Parrish, 805 F.2d 583 (5th Cir. 1986)…pport for the equal protection allegations and concluding that Martin’s profanity was not constitutionally protected. Martin appeals all but the due process claim. II. ANALYSIS Appellant asserts his language was not obscene, Roth v. United States, 364 U.S. 476, 77 S.Ct. 1304, 1 L.Ed.2d 1498 (1967), but only profane and as such enjoys constitutional protection unless it caused disruption.2 Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568, 62 S.Ct. 766, 86 L.Ed. 1031 (1942). We find this argument an incomplete and…