First Amendment Library:
Emanuel Redfield

ADVANCED SEARCH

A student’s inflammatory speech on a public sidewalk, which argued for violent revolution by black Americans and against President Truman, led to restlessness among the crowd and “at least one threat of violence.” Police officers asked the student to stop speaking three times, and after his third refusal, arrested him for disorderly conduct.

READ MORE


Ginsberg, who operated a stationery store and luncheonette, was convicted of selling “girlie” magazines to a 16-year-old boy in violation of the New York Penal Law, which made it unlawful “knowingly to sell … to a minor” under 17 “(a) any picture … which depicts nudity … and which is harmful to minors,” and “(b) any … magazine … which contains [such pictures] and which, taken as a whole, is harmful to minors.” Ginsberg challenged the law, and his conviction, as a violation of the 1st Amendment.

READ MORE


This is a proceeding under § 22-a of the New York Code of Criminal Procedure (L. 1941, c. 925), as amended in 1954 (L. 1954, c. 702). This section supplements the existing conventional criminal provision dealing with pornography by authorizing the chief executive, or legal officer, of a municipality to invoke a "limited injunctive remedy," under closely defined procedural safeguards, against the sale and distribution of written and printed matter found after due trial to be obscene, and to obtain an order for the seizure, in default of surrender, of the condemned publications.[1]

READ MORE


This case, like Ginzburg v. United States, ante, p. 463, also decided today, involves convictions under a criminal obscenity statute. A panel of three judges of the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York found appellant guilty of violating § 1141 of the New York Penal Law[1] by hiring others to prepare obscene books, publishing obscene books, and possessing obscene books with intent to sell them.[2] 26 Misc. 2d 152, 207 N. Y. S. 2d 390 *504 (1960). He was sentenced to prison terms aggregating three years and ordered to pay $12,000 in fines for these crimes.[3] The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed those convictions. 17 App. Div. 2d 243, 234 N. Y. S. 2d 342 (1962). The Court of Appeals affirmed without opinion. 15 N. Y. 2d 671, 204 N. E. 2d 209 (1964), remittitur amended, 15 N. Y. 2d 724, 205 N. E. 2d 201 (1965). We noted probable jurisdiction. 380 U. S. 960. We affirm.

READ MORE


386 U.S. 767 (1967) REDRUP v. NEW YORK. No. 3. Supreme Court of United States. Argued October 10, 1966. Decided May 8, 1967.[*] CERTIORARI TO THE APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, FIRST JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. Sam Rosenwein argued the cause for petitioner in No. 3. With him on the briefs were Stanley… Read more

READ MORE