Go Back Research Article February, 2012

Obscenity Conundrum, Contingent Harms, and Constitutional Consistency

Author Neil M. Malamuth Author Mark Huppin

Abstract

This Article addresses the intersection between law and science as they relate to the regulation of "hard-core" pornography under obscenity doctrine." We do not take for granted that pornography should be regulated under the law. Because we do not presume acceptability of regulation as a matter of course, we begin by examining obscenity doctrine's proffered ontological justifications or constitutionally permissible reasons for being. These include questions pertaining to First Amendment values, as well as justifications for regulation emanating from both offense-based and harm-based areas of concern.

Keywords

Obscenity Doctrine Hard-Core Pornography Constitutional Law First Amendment Pornography Regulation Harm-Based Concerns Offense-Based Concerns Legal Science Intersection Contingent Harms Constitutional Consistency Pornography Ethics Legal Justifications Regulatory Framework First Amendment Values Pornography Debate
Details
Volume 23
Pages 31-65
ISSN 1044-4386