New York v. Ferber
New York v. Ferber is a significant Supreme Court case that addressed the intersection of child protection laws and First Amendment rights. The case emerged when Paul Ferber, the owner of a Manhattan adult bookstore, was convicted for selling films depicting young boys in sexual situations. Initially, the New York Court of Appeals reversed the conviction, arguing that the state's statute violated First Amendment protections by criminalizing merely indecent material rather than obscene content. However, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld Ferber's conviction, with Justice Byron R. White stating that child pornography constitutes a category of material not protected by the First Amendment.
The Court emphasized that the state has a compelling interest in protecting children from sexual exploitation and abuse. It recognized the intrinsic link between the distribution of child pornography and the exploitation of minors. Additionally, the Court asserted that such materials hold minimal literary, artistic, scientific, or educational value. While allowing for the prosecution of child pornography with less rigorous standards than those applied to adult pornography, the Court noted the need for clear definitions in state laws regarding what constitutes illegal material. This ruling highlights the ongoing debate surrounding free speech and the protection of vulnerable populations, particularly children.
New York v. Ferber
Date: July 2, 1982
Citation: 459 U.S. 747
Issue(s): Child pornography
Significance: In this case, the Supreme Court held that erotic and sexually explicit depictions of children, whether obscene or indecent, have no protection under the First Amendment.
The state of New York, like nineteen other states, had a statute that criminalized the dissemination of materials depicting the sexual conduct of children under the age of sixteen, regardless of whether the material satisfied the legal definition of obscenity established by the Supreme Court in Miller v. California (1973). The owner of a Manhattan adult bookstore, Paul Ferber, was prosecuted and convicted for selling films that depicted young boys masturbating. However, the New York Court of Appeals reversed his conviction, holding that the state statute violated the First Amendment because it criminalized materials that were simply indecent, not obscene. The state then appealed the case to the Supreme Court.
The Court unanimously upheld Ferber’s conviction in the lower New York court. Justice Byron R. White, writing for the Court, proclaimed that child pornography is “a category of material outside the protection of the First Amendment.” He emphasized five points. First, the state has a compelling interest in safeguarding minor children from sexual abuse and exploitation. Second, the distribution of child pornography is intrinsically related to this abuse and exploitation. Third, the sexual abuse and exploitation of children is illegal everywhere in the United States. Fourth, child pornography has very modest literary, artistic, scientific, or educational value. Finally, the recognition that a category of material is outside of First Amendment protection is compatible with previous decisions of the Court.
Concluding that government has more discretion to prosecute child pornography than is true of adult pornography, White concluded that the standards may be less rigorous than the three-pronged test of the earlier Miller decision. He insisted, nevertheless, that state laws must clearly and explicitly define which kinds of photographs, films, and conduct are illegal. In a brief concurrence, Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., joined by Justice Thurgood Marshall, agreed that most child pornography did not merit First Amendment protection, but he nevertheless asserted that it would be unconstitutional to prosecute depictions of children that are of artistic or scientific value.