On April 22, 1957, government attorney Roger Fisher appeared before the Supreme Court in defense of the federal obscenity statute, which criminalizes the distribution of obscene materials through the mails. Although the power of the federal and state governments to regulate obscenity had been assumed for nearly 170 years, Second Circuit Judge Jerome Frank’s concurrence in United States v. Roth had critically appraised the precarious historical, jurisprudential, and sociological foundation on which this presumption rested. Judge Frank concluded that although he was bound to uphold Samuel Roth’s conviction as a member of an inferior court, the Supreme Court’s “clear and present danger” precedent strongly implied the unconstitutionality of the federal obscenity statute.
Scholars discuss the most significant immigration-related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, their ramifications, and what to expect in 2020.
Experts discuss legal developments and related ramifications one year after President Trump declared a national emergency at the U.S. Southern Border with Mexico in order to build a wall.
Do new domestic terrorism laws put Black Lives Matter supporters, anti-war protestors, and/or animal rights activists at risk? Do they presently incorporate sufficient safeguards against such misuse and abuse?
Migrant children fleeing violence in their native countries have experienced severe psychological trauma before and after entering the country when we separated them from their families and placed them in detention facilities, and some families remain separated.