United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. — Thomas, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Thomas, concurring, explains that although obscenity regulations might have authorized a total ban on some programming in this case, the litigation proceeded on the assumption the speech was indecent but protected. Because the Government declined to defend the statute as obscenity regulation, Thomas joins the Court in invalidating § 505 under strict First Amendment scrutiny. He notes separately that signal bleed material might qualify as obscenity.