Supreme Court of the United States
Kingsley Books, Inc. v. Brown, Corporation Counsel
June 24, 1957354 U.S. 436
Summary
The Court upheld New York’s § 22‑a, holding that its limited, prompt‑trial injunction scheme for obscene publications does not violate the First Amendment or the Due Process Clause. The majority distinguished the statute from Near v. Minnesota because it restrains only material already adjudicated obscene, and it affirmed the lower court’s decision. Two dissents argued that the scheme constitutes an unconstitutional prior restraint and lacks a jury‑trial right, and each would reverse the judgment.
Holding
- Whether New York’s § 22‑a authorizing a pendente‑lite injunction against allegedly obscene publications constitutes an unconstitutional prior restraint.. The statute is constitutional; the limited, prompt‑trial injunction is a permissible remedial scheme that does not amount to an unlawful prior restraint of speech.
Docket 107
Cited authorities
- 4 Vand. L. Rev. 533
- 52 Stat. 1044
Cited by
- Kent County Prosecutor v. Robert Emmett Goodrich Corporation
- Central Maine Power Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
- State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Hudson County News Company
- State of Connecticut v. Baruch S. LeWitt State of Connecticut v. Herbert S. Nitke State of Connecticut v. Howard E…
- State of Connecticut v. James J. Onorato
- State of Connecticut v. Baruch S. LeWitt
- Stephanie Loza, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Leonard Panish, as Registrar-Recorder
- Gerawan Farming, Inc., Plaintiff and Appellant v. William J. Lyons, Jr., as Secretary