Document: 352 U.S. 380 77 S.Ct. 524 1 L.Ed.2d 412 Alfred E. BUTLER, Appellant,v.STATE OF MICHIGAN. No. 16. Argued Oct. 16, 1956. Decided Feb. 25, 1957. Mr. Manuel Lee Robbins, New York City, for the appellant. Edmund Shepherd, Detroit, Mich., appellee. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered opinion of Court. This appeal from a judgment conviction entered by Recorder's Court City Michigan challenges constitutionality following provision, § 343, Penal Code, Comp.Laws Supp.1954, 750.343: 2 'Any person who shall import, print, publish, sell, possess with intent to design, prepare, loan, give away, distribute or offer sale, any book, magazine, newspaper, writing, pamphlet, ballad, printed paper, picture, drawing, photograph, publication other thing, including recordings, containing obscene, immoral, lewd lascivious language, prints, pictures, figures descriptions, tending incite minors violent depraved immoral acts, manifestly corruption morals youth, introduce into family, school place education buy, procure, receive have in his possession, such either purpose exhibition, loan circulation, same education, be guilty misdemeanor.' 3 Appellant was charged its violation selling police officer what trial judge characterized as 'a book lewd, youth.' moved dismiss proceeding on claim that application 343 unduly restricted freedom speech protected Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment statute (1) prohibited distribution general public basis undesirable influence it may upon youth; (2) damned and proscribed sale merely because some isolated passages appeared objectionable when divorced whole; (3) failed provide sufficiently definite standard guilt. After hearing evidence, denied motion, and, an oral opinion, held '* * defendant is he sold Detroit this language (the deemed offensive), also feels even viewing whole, language) not necessary proper development theme nor conflict expressed therein.' fined $100. 4 Pressing federal claims, appellant applied leave Supreme Michigan. Although State consented granting 'because issues involved case are great interest, appears further clarification statute) necessary,' denied. In view denial, here Detroit. We noted probable jurisdiction. 350 963, 76 432, 100 L.Ed. 837. 5 Appellant's argument took wide sweep. need follow him. Thus, unnecessary dissect remarks order determine whether construed ban books certain their passages, viewed isolation, were objectionable. Likewise, we free put aside law falls within doctrine whereby obscenity found invalid Winters v. People York, 333 507, 68 665, 92 840. 6 It clear record convicted Michigan, made offense him make available reading (and fact officer) potentially deleterious youth. The insists that, thus quarantining against too rugged grown men women shield juvenile innocence, exercising power promote welfare. Surely, burn house roast pig. Indeed, Solicitor General has, characteristic candor, advised has specifically designed protect children obscene matter 'tending youth.'* But violating statute. 7 before us legislation reasonably evil which said deal. incidence enactment reduce adult population only fit children. thereby arbitrarily curtails one those liberties individual, now enshrined Amendment, history attested indispensable conditions maintenance progress society. constrained reverse conviction. 8 Reversed. 9 BLACK concurs result. Section 142 Michigan's 1948, 750.142, provides: away way furnish minor child paper descriptions newspapers, pamphlets devoted criminal news, reports, deeds, manner hire, use employ books, papers, having care, custody control child, permit her engage employment, 143, 750.143, exhibit street highway, passing pamphlet thing figures, pamphlets, reports thereof

Category: 2