Legal Document

390 U.S. 676 88 Supreme Court Reporter 1298 20 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 225 INTERSTATE CIRCUIT, INC., Appellant,v.CITY OF DALLAS. UNITED ARTISTS CORPORATION, Appellant, versus CITY Nos. 56, 64. Argued Jan. 15 and 16, 1968. Decided April 22, [Syllabus from pages 676-677 intentionally omitted] Louis Nizer, New York City, Grover Hartt, Jr., Dallas, Tex., for appellants. N. Alex Bickley, appellee. Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Appellants are an exhibitor distributor a motion picture named 'Viva Maria,' which, pursuant to city ordinance, Motion Picture Classification Board appellee City Dalas classified as 'not suitable young persons.' A county court upheld Board's determination enjoined exhibition film without acceptance by appellants requirements imposed restricted classification. The Texas Civil Appeals affirmed,1 we noted probable jurisdiction, 387 903, 87 1685, 18 620, consider First Fourteenth Amendment issues raised with respect appellee's classification ordinance. 2 That adopted in 1965, may be summarized follows.2 It establishes Board, composed nine appointed members, all whom serve pay. classifies films 'suitable persons' or persons,' persons being defined children who have not reached their 16th birthday. An must specially licensed show suitable' films. 3 ordinance requires exhibitor, before any initial showing film, file proposed together summary its plot similar information. is approved if affirmatively agrees it, takes no action upon it within five days filing. 4 If majority dissatisfied classification, required project at least members earliest practicable time. At showing, also present testimony other support his Within two issue order. Should disagree, he days3 notice nonacceptance. then go three seek temporary injunction, hearing set on that application thereafter; waive requests merits permanent injunction join exhibitor's request. does 10 nonacceptance, order suspended.4 define scope judicial review determination, but held de novo trial was required.5 seeks appellate review, refused appeals, statutory notices times, request advance case court's docket, i.e., do everything can assure speedy determination. 5 enforced primarily misdemeanor penalty: subject fine up $200 exhibits advertisements clearly stating posted, same program knowingly admits youth under age 16 view guardian spouse accompanying him,6 makes false willfully misleading statement submitting having valid license therefor. 6 penalty applicable obtains admission falsely giving years over, person sells gives ticket statements enable such gain admission.7 7 Other means enforcement, against provided. Repeated violations persistent failure 'to use reasonable diligence determine whether those seeking admittance below sixteen,' basis revocation films.8 Such failure, convictions inter alia, 'public nuisances,' which restrain suit injunctive relief. 8 substantive standards governing follows: 9 "Not means: '(1) Describing portraying brutality, criminal violence depravity manner be, judgment likely incite encourage crime delinquency part persons; 11 '(2) nudity beyond customary limits candor community, sexual promiscuity extra-marital abnormal relations appeal prurient interest. 12 'A shall considered 'likely encourage' persons, if, there substantial probability will create impression conduct profitable, desirable, acceptable, respectable, praiseworthy commonly accepted. 13 appealing 'prurient interest' calculated dominent effect substantially arouse desire. In determining whole, rather than isolated portions, harmful effects outweigh artistic educational values 14 attack unconstitutionally vague. We agree. pictures are, course, protected Amendment, Joseph Burstyn, Incorporated Wilson, 343 495, 72 777, 96 L.Ed. 1098 (1952), thus start premise '(p)recision regulation touchstone,' NAACP Button, 371 415, 438, 83 328, 340, 405 (1963). And while true this strike down, broad generalized attack, prior restraint requirement submitted censors exhibition, Times Film Corporation Chicago, 365 43, 81 391, 403 (1961), has been retreat area rigorous insistence procedural safeguards superintendence censor's action. See Freedman State Maryland, 380 51, 85 734, 649 (1965).9 Winters People York, 333 507, 68 665, 92 840 (1948), struck down vague indefinite standard interpreted state 'criminal news stories deeds bloodshed lust, so massed become vehicles inciting violent depraved crimes * *.' Id., 518, 676. supra, dealt licensing 'sacrilegious,' found all-inclusive definition result 'substantially unbridled censorship.' U.S., 502, 777. Following following vague: 'of character prejudicial best interests people said City,' Gelling Texas, 960, 1002, 1359 (1952); 'moral, amusing harmless,' Superior Films, Department Education, 346 587, 74 286, 98 329 (1954); 'immoral,' 'tend corrupt morals,' Commercial Pictures Regents, 'approve (as) moral proper; disapprove cruel, obscene, indecent immoral, tend debase morals.' Holmby Productions, Vaughn, 350 870, 76 117, 100 770 (1955).10 Kingsley international 360 684, 699—702, 79 1362, 1370—1372, 1512 (Clark, J., concurring result). vice vagueness particularly pronounced where expression sought subjected licensing. unlikely what Dallas would significant makers Hollywood Europe. But constitutionally do, cities States. Indeed, told used model legislation localities. Thus, one wishes convey ideas through medium, course includes interested much making money, proposes how terms schemes this. unable means, runs risk foreclosed, practical effect, portion movie-going public. Rather run risk, might choose nothing innocuous, perhaps save so-called 'adult' picture. Moreover, local cannot afford losing youthful audience when marginal interest adults—perhaps Maria'—may contract only totally inane. vast wasteland some described reference another medium verdant paradise comparison. here therefore, broader merely maker, distributor, certainly youths 16. 17 Of 781, '(i)t follow Constitution absolute freedom exhibit every kind times places.' What least, cases above illustrate, restrictions 'the censor adrift boundless sea *,' id., 504, 782. short, Frankfurter said, 'legislation vague, language loose, leave apply too wide discretion 694, 1368, (concurring result), reason 'where rested, first instance, administrative agency, available rendered inoperative (by vagueness),' 532, 796 opinion). extent sufficiently guide censor, problem cured affording review. Vague standards, unless narrowed interpretation, erratic administration judicial; 'individual impressions yardstick action, accordance beliefs individual law,' 701, 1372 result).11 dangers inherent strikingly illustrated these cases. Five viewed Maria.' Eight voted classify ninth member voting. gave reasons determination.12 Appellee alleged petition warranted because portrayed 'sexual interests.' Two clergyman lawyer, testified hearing. Each adverted several scenes opinion, male-female relationships way contrary 'acceptable behavior.' acknowledged, clergymen were involved violence, most farcial, 'sacrilege' entered into both conceded asserted portrayal promiscuity' implicit explicit, product inference by, imagination of, viewer. 19 So far 'judicial superintendence'13 concerned, judge, after viewing argument, stated merely: 'Oh, & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions realize you gentlemen right. There features look me unsuitable people. enjoin exhibiting it.'14 Nor did provide enlightenment narrowing Artists argued obscenity forth Roth States, 354 476, 77 1304, 1498 (1957), decisions ought controlling.15 civil held, alternatively, (1) them resulted suppression offending classification; (2) Maria' obscene adults (a patently untenable conclusion) therefore entitled constitutional protection; (3) modified children, them, conclusion given interpretation specific provision 402 South Western Reporter, 2nd 770, 775—776. regard last alternative holding, conclude ruled 'portrayal acceptable,' 775, itself children.16 'sufficiently definite.' Ibid. left directed words term defined17 courts. could extend, depending one's judgment, obvious contacts outside marital relationship. determinative 'describing portraying' subjects covered (see 681), including promiscuity,' 'such "likely accepted.' excessive literalism insist, appellants, six adjectives disjunctive, they represent separate subtle determinations make, results Nonetheless, '(w)hat viewer glorification idea 'desirable, acceptable proper' notions entirely devoid teaching. understanding included proper.' This less roving commission 1372, result).18 21 Vagueness attendant evils earlier described, see 1302—1304, objectionable direct suppression. Cf. Bantam Books, Sullivan, 372 58, 631, 584 (1963).19 answer argument particular say salutary purpose protecting children. permissible directly proportional to, function power regulate control As Chief Judge Fuld said: 22 'It essential aimed allegedly expression—no enacted adults—be drawn reasonably precise governed law administer understand meaning application.' Kahan, N.Y.2d 311, 313, 258 N.Y.S.2d 393, 206 N.E.2d, 333, 335 (1965) opinion.)20 23 vices—the lack guidance adjust law, well possible curtailing effectiveness review—are same. 24 our province draft legislation. Suffice recognized believe 'motion possess greater capacity evil, among modes expression,' 780 indicated more generally strong abiding youth, dissemination juveniles access material adults. Ginsberg 629, 1274, 195.21 Here absence narrowly drawn, definite officials follow,' Niemotko 340 268, 271, 71 325, 327, 95 267 (1951), fatal.22 25 reversed remanded further proceedings inconsistent opinion. 26 ordered. 27 Judgment remanded. APPENDIX TO OPINION THE COURT. 28 Chapter 46A 1960 Revised Code Criminal Ordinances amended, provides: Section 46A—1. Definition Terms: 29 (a) 'Film' series films, full length short subject, include newsreels actual current events pictorial day. 30 (b) 'Exhibit' theatre public place tickets sold admission. 31 (c) 'Exhibitor' person, firm corporation film. 32 (d) 'Young person' attained sixteenth 33 (e) 'Board' established 46A—2 34 (f) 'Not 35 deliquency 36 37 dominant persons. 38 (g) 'Classify' is: 39 Suitable or; 40 Not 41 (h) 'Advertisement' commercial promotional initiated designed bring attention increase sale exhibitions same, newspaper, billboard, picture, television, radio, media originating Dallas. 42 (i) 'Initial exhibition' 43 (j) 'Subsequent subsequent different exhibitor. 44 (k) 'File' deliver Secretary safekeeping record 45 (l) 'Classification order' written classifying granting refusing change 46 (m) applied subsection 46A—7 attempting enforce Attorney representing 46A—2. Establishment Board: 47 hereby created known Chairman Members Mayor Council whose Council. pay adopt rules regulations deem proceeding deliberations time meeting. These approval vacancy occurs death, resignation otherwise, body appoint fill unexpired term. 48 good, moral, law-abiding citizens chosen cross section community. Insofar practicable, educated experienced fields: art, drama, literature, philosophy, sociology, psychology, history, education, music, science related fields. act Board. 46A—3. Procedure: 49 Before exhibited, title name producer, information rule require, examine approves mark 'approved' own fails act, is, either hold (5) filed, approved. 50 examination satisfied proper, suitably equipped specified time, due availability designated representative, make days, question. 51 Any previously classified. No allowed contain sworn grounds based. Upon filing application, immediately notify applicants parties, exhibitors preparing hearing, hear proper offered, thereafter approving changing changed seven (7) alter advertising policy comply 52 order, mail notice. 53 binding until 46A—4. Offenses: 54 unlawful employee: 55 To provided 56 advertisement 57 keeping posted prominently front exhibited. 58 (4) Knowingly sell give 59 permit 60 (6) scene unclassified moving still, persons'; preview trailer containing shown separately provisions 46A—3 61 62 (8) force hereinafter 63 person: 64 sixteen (16) gaining 65 enter remain room 66 she married 67 69 70 enabling prosecution involves entering, purchasing ticket, defense accompanied parent legally guardian, husband wife, throughout 46A—5. License: Every holding issued issuance 73 46A—6. Revocation suspension license: Whenever acting direction, ten (10) complaint repeatedly violated persistently failed (16), cause complainants involved. authority subpoenas requiring witnesses appear testify party process. If, evidence find charges true, revoking suspending provided, insofar grants privilege pictures, period exceed year, reprimand violation continue. 75 likewise, revoke suspend unreasonably produce delayed submission requested 46A—7. Judicial Review: non-acceptance intention question Thereupon duty following: District County, defendant-exhibitor, contests 78 thereof. event defendant-exhibitor appears waives otherwise Rules Procedure, proceed Procedure merits, and/or early nevertheless board obtain setting Procedure. granted appeals Appeals, Statutes receiving copy brief, reply required, prepared submit oral take expedite jointly docket preferential afforded matters. 80 should affirm writ error Court, error, denies elects appeal, periods new signing (or Monday ends Saturday Sunday, day Legal Holiday), amend prerequisite motion. signed denying overruling signed, complete steps necessary perfection Transcript, Statement Facts Appellant's brief. Failure constitute abandonment appeal. On requesting 82 reverses refuses reverse grant desires decision rehearing rendition Monday, rehearing, rights Appeals. docket. nonacceptance aside suspended end period. 84 Subdivision 46A—7, bound except had connection Subsection above. 46A—8. Public Nuisances: acts declared nuisances: 86 Subdivisions (1), (2), (3), (6), 46A—4 admitted. admitted years. 89 convicted many 46A—9. Injunctions: 90 committed 46A—8 nuisance, competent jurisdiction restraining acts. 46A—10. Exemption Law: 91 Nothing construed preempted Article 527 Penal amended. 46A—11. Severability Clause: section, subsection, sentence, provision, clause phrase invalid reason, render deemed severable purpose. 93 SECTION 2. violate guilty conviction thereof Hundred Dollars ($200.00) each offense punishable offense, exhibited according offense. 94 3. Ordinance Number 10963 heretofore 5, things repealed naught, lieu 4. fact passed unenforceable Courts Federal creates urgency emergency preservation peace, comfort general welfare passage, accordingly ordained. DOUGLAS, BLACK joins, concurring. 97 my dissenting Page 650, 1286, 210, assume arguendo censorship publications, adults, process, very range indeed movie, novel, poem, article harmful. test, agree Brother HARLAN discriminating modern man intelligently. My approach problems quite different. reach reaches opinions concur reversing judgment. 99 HARLAN, 47, usher phase intractable problem: prevent obnoxious stringent govern distribution adults? 101 case, upholds statute courts, embodies diluted form 1498, prevailing Book Named 'John Cleland's Memoirs Woman Pleasure' General Commonwealth Massachusetts, 383 413, 975, 1. 64, Interstate Circuit cases, strikes ground couched, however, terms. none pass condemned 102 enters stock field. produced variety views unmatched adjudication.1 steadfastly maintain Amendments society powerless protect even filthiest materials.2 past present, ever point view. sharp divergence Roth, supra,3 Memoirs, supra,4 Ginzburg 463, 942, 31,5 judging unprotected. Most Justices 'obscenity' pale governmental seemingly Roth-Memoirs-Ginzburg tests falls 'hard core pornography,' equal between federal authority.6 Another pornography' suppressed, authority.7 still view, writer, suppressed Government, whereas permitted wider deal matter justifiable strict rules.8 103 differences us process work reviewing determinations. One simply ascertain lower courts made genuine effort tests, questioned accepted, findings fact.9 inherently entails ultimate responsibility, hence incumbent judge ourselves, were, vel non challenged matter.10 104 upshot viewpoint anyone undertakes Court's since himself utter bewilderment.11 From standpoint spend inordinate amount absurd business perusing miserable stuff pours mostly better second-guessing judges. rare instances, venture say, free-speech stake, right obscenity. 105 improvement chaotic affairs come whole concern, tolerates materials Government. Reiterating expressed opinions, limit recognize called withhold hand interfering instances prudish overzealousness. 496, S.Ct., 1315; Manual Enterprises Day, 370 478, 1432, 639; Jacobellis Ohio, 378 184, 203, 1676, 1685; 455, 995. juvenile field think tolerant applications. doctrinaire thought stand functional approach, revert basic concepts recent respected fundamental genius system, namely autonomy affairs. 106 now hand. Ginsberg, fully preserving, 107 respectfully dissent. holds, score vagueness. ambiguities about expresses concern essentially two.12 First, promiscuity.'13 Second, provides 'shall concerned disagree 108 seem inadequate granted, differ standards; central lesson efforts verbal formulae, obscenity, men can, ordinarily assessment materials. truth demanded precision give, sensibly expected law. 109 always asked much.14 petitioner sentenced years' imprisonment forbade mailing 'obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy publication character.'15 491, 1312. Alberts California, companion California 'tendency deprave readers.' 498, 1316. definitions statute, yet explicitly rejected 'provide ascertainable guilt statutes necessarily imprecise, emphasized, quoting Petrillo, 332 1, 7—8, 1538, 1542, 1877, "Constitution require impossible standards'; 'conveys warning proscribed measured common practices. *"16 Yet repeated unlike Alberts, involve proscription prosecution, fail adequate restricted, administration.17 110 Although finds unnecessary preferable face premises reiterated here, condemning acted limits. 111 judgments (1966). denied discretionary KF62 § 1257(2). Appendix parties certain authoritatively State. decision, text taken parties' conflicting interpretations, nor expressing validity here. two-day apparently attempt prompt final 'any exhibitor' reclassification assert that, despite clear practice free notification challenge pending, though 10-day n. 2, supra. 774—775. says (parent) spouse, attend read existence accompaniment solely ensue. 6, purchases child sure, sanctions litigation, special unconstitutional violative Butler Michigan, 352 380, 524, 412 Hughes, 249 F.Supp. 19, (D.C.N.D.Tex., 1965), ruling Circuit, 366 590, 593, (C.A.5th Cir. 1966). Teitel Cusack, 139, 754, 966. numerous effect. See, e.g., Police Commissioner Siegel Enterprises, Inc., 223 Md. 110, 162 Atlantic 727, cert. denied, 364 909, 273, (1960) ('violent bloodshed, lust immorality eighteen, filthy, disgusting presented immoral acts'); North Eastern (1965); Bookcase, 409, 252 433, 201 (1964) ('descriptions illicit sex immorality'); Hallmark Carroll, 384 Pa. 348, 121 (1956) ('sacrilegious, indecent, morals'). Paramount Distributing 172 (D.C.N.D.Ill.1959), alternatively 'tends toward creating minds children' indefinite; legislative ante, 643, 1282, 206, 'harmful minors' specifically Amsterdam, Note, Void-For-Vagueness Doctrine U.Pa.L.Rev. 67, (1960); Klein, Censorship: American British Experience, Vill.L.Rev. 419, 428 (1967). Compare Liberties Union Ill.App.2d 278, 141 (1957): '(T)he censoring authority, obliged specify doing *. court, record, addition itself, decide ban Without procedure, tribunal responsibilities authority.' Accord, Zenith 291 785 (C.A.7th Cir., 1961). Harv.L.Rev. 326, 338 (1957). 70, response findings, stated: 'I decline. irons little fellow. trying big got others home Hill County helping out, it. decline.' contend vagueness, authorizes impermissible grounds, arguing judged light disposition issue. justice author agreed, relevant clarifies adopted. S.W.2d, 777—779. amendment March 1966, defines 'indiscriminate intimacies herein include, limited intercourse defined.' incite' 'create (the) desirable,' etc., presentation (young persons') interest.' alternative, relied testified, court. Commission charged 'manifestly tending corruption youth' (372 59, 633) regulatory suppressing functions, although informal achieve result. 'system censorship' (id., 71, 631) Amendment. important factor Commission's 'vague uninformative' mandate, 'done precise.' I. Carmen, Movies, Censorship, Law, passim (1966); 455 (1967); 342 also, Katzev Los Angeles, Cal.2d 360, 341 Pacific 310 (1959) (magazine sales minors 18); (book (sale publications (special 21). generally, Law 247—260 Yale L.J. (1959). violates teachings secure assurance 'prompt decision' (380 734.) think, guaranty (in classification). freedman emphasized 'only procedure suffices impose restraint' 739), chooses approval. constrained significantly contest injunction. burden going once sustaining Finally, appellant contends infringes providing participation wish not. cf. 584, m. (1963), assures supra), intervene date decided, total Justices. Brown, 436, 1325, 1469 (four opinions); supra Regents University (six Smith 361 147, 215, 205 (five (three Marcus Search Warrants Property East Tenth St., Kansas Mo., 367 717, 1708, 1127 (two 639 793 Quantity Copies Books Kansas, 205, 1723, 809 Mishkin 958, opinions). 508, 1321 (dissenting opinion); 196, 1682 (separate 482, 950, 953 test 'whether average applying contemporary community theme 489, 1311 (note omitted). elaborated 'it sex; offensive affronts relating description representation matters; utterly redeeming social value.' 418, 977. Ginzberg 'test' difficult precision. 'in close pandering probative nature satisfy test.' 474, 949. 'simply elaborates judged.' 475, 950. 'support contexts escape condemnation.' Pandering evidently encompasses "business purveying textual graphic openly advertised erotic customers." 467, 945 193—195, 1681—1682 (opinion Brennan, J.). 197, 1683 Stewart, 1315 995 202, 1685 Jacobellis, 190, 1679 J.); 497—498, 1315—1316 708, 1375 Keney 388 440, 2091, 1302; Friedman 441, 1303; Ratner 442, 2092, 1304; Cobert 443, 1305; Sheperd 444, 2093, 1306; Avansino 446, 1308; Aday 447, 2095, 1309; Corinth Publications, Wesberry, 448, 2096, 1310; 449, 2098, 1311; Rosenbloom Virginia, 450, 1312; 452, 2104, 1314; Mazes 453, 2105, Schackman 454, 2107, 1316; Landau Fording, 456, 2109, 1317; Potomac News company 389 233, 46; Conner Hammond, 48, 234, 47; Central Magazine Sales, Limited 50, 235, 49; Chance 89, 253, 256. emphasizes proffer clarification compels ordinance's terms, not, offer independent ambiguous. acknowledges promiscuity, definition's adequacy. pertinent note impermissibly 'which portrays presents patterns 685, 1364. Clark, result, relies heavily, 'Court 695, 1369. 704, 1373. went "(s)exual immorality' branch implications dominate context. hardly conceive lascivious matter, land nearly hundred years, Act 3, 1865, Statutes-at-Large 1873, 599, whatever allowable prohibition. 'lewd, lascivious' concreteness saying immorality." 695—696, import transport interstate commerce book, pamphlet, motion-picture paper, letter, writing, print, 1462. Similarly, 1461 vile' article. §§ 1463, 1464, 1465. sections profuse descriptive 'is juries conclusions material, insufficiently requirements. But, experience statute. consequences accept jury system.' 492, 1313, 30. Precisely reasoning boards like cost (at initially) classifications, lengthy imprisonment. suppose formula offers warnings Surely 'redeeming value,' 'patent offensiveness,' clarity. wonders rationale 'guidance conduct' imagine overbroad, 'new subjectivity' search 'leer sensualist.' Magrath, Obscenity Cases: Grapes 1966 Sup.Ct.Rev. 7, 61.

Classification Label: 2