Court Opinion

ID: 9423671
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:08:42.626116+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:45.400645
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Douglas,
with whom Mr. Justice Black joins,
concurring.
As I indicated in my dissenting opinion in Ginsberg v. New York, ante, p. 650, if we assume arguendo that the censorship of obscene publications, whether for children or for adults, is in the area of substantive due proc*704ess, the States have a very wide range indeed for determining what kind of movie, novel, poem, or article is harmful. If that were the test, I would agree with my Brother Harlan that the standard of “sexual promiscuity” in this Dallas ordinance is sufficiently precise and discriminating for modern man to apply intelligently.
My approach to these problems is, of course, quite different. I reach the result the Court reaches for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinions in Ginsberg and other cases and therefore concur in reversing the present judgment.