Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/09pdf/08-769.pdf
Page Number: 9

Cite as:  559 U. S. ____ (2010) 

5 

Opinion of the Court 

II 

The  Government’s  primary  submission  is  that  §48  nec-
essarily  complies  with  the  Constitution  because  the
banned  depictions  of  animal  cruelty,  as  a  class,  are 
categorically  unprotected  by  the  First  Amendment.    We 
disagree.

The  First  Amendment  provides  that  “Congress  shall 
make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.”  “[A]s a
general  matter,  the  First  Amendment  means  that  gov-
ernment has no power to restrict expression because of its 
message,  its  ideas,  its  subject  matter,  or  its  content.” 
Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, 535 U. S. 564, 
573 (2002) (internal quotation marks omitted).  Section 48 
explicitly  regulates  expression  based  on  content:  The 
statute  restricts  “visual  [and]  auditory  depiction[s],”  such
as photographs, videos, or sound recordings, depending on 
whether  they  depict  conduct  in  which  a  living  animal  is
intentionally  harmed.    As  such,  §48  is  “ ‘presumptively 
invalid,’  and  the  Government  bears  the  burden  to  rebut 
that  presumption.”  United  States  v.  Playboy  Entertain-
ment  Group,  Inc.,  529  U. S.  803,  817  (2000)  (quoting 
R. A. V.  v.  St.  Paul,  505  U. S.  377,  382  (1992);  citation 
omitted).

“From 1791 to the present,” however, the First Amend-
ment  has  “permitted  restrictions  upon  the  content  of
speech in a few limited areas,” and has never “include[d] a 
freedom to disregard these traditional limitations.”  Id., at 
382–383.  These  “historic  and  traditional  categories  long
familiar to the bar,” Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of 
N.  Y.  State  Crime  Victims  Bd.,  502  U. S.  105,  127  (1991) 
(KENNEDY, J., concurring in judgment)—including obscen-
ity, Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 483 (1957), defa-
mation,  Beauharnais  v.  Illinois,  343  U. S.  250,  254–255 
(1952),  fraud,  Virginia  Bd.  of  Pharmacy  v.  Virginia  Citi-
zens  Consumer  Council,  Inc.,  425  U. S.  748,  771  (1976), 
incitement,  Brandenburg  v.  Ohio,  395  U. S.  444,  447–449