Case library · Banned
The Suggestive Postmarks
Ginzburg v. United States (1966)
Charge: Mailing obscene material (federal obscenity statute)Court: U.S. Supreme CourtState: PennsylvaniaDocket: Banned
The facts
A publisher and his companies mailed three items: an expensive hardcover magazine with articles about sex, a newsletter on sexual topics, and a book sold as a woman's sexual autobiography. He first asked for mailing rights from two small towns whose names sounded like sexual jokes, so the postmark would be suggestive; when refused, he used a third town with a similar name. His ads promised 'sexual candour'. He was charged on 28 counts of mailing obscene matter. He says the works themselves have value and are not obscene.
You have the facts the court had. Guilty or not guilty? Call it in the game with your friends, then see what the court actually decided. Wrong call, you drink.
Citation: Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463 (1966)
Read more at supreme.justia.com. The source reveals the outcome.