Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

sl8

(16,671 posts)
4. From the borough obscenity ordinance:
Sat Jul 17, 2021, 08:47 AM
Jul 2021

From https://ecode360.com/35328682 [emphasis added] :


[...]

§ 3-8.2 Determination of Obscenity.

[1980 Code § 152-2]The word "obscene" shall mean any material, communication or performance which the average person applying contemporary community standards existing within the municipality, would find, when considered as a whole:

a. Appeals to the prurient interest;

b. Depicts or describes in a patently offensive way sexual conduct as hereinafter specifically defined, or depicts or exhibits offensive nakedness as hereinafter specifically defined; and

c. Lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

[...]



Aside from the constitutionality, I'm not sure why it doesn't fit the "political" exception. Maybe the judge didn't consider it seriously political.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Civil Liberties»N.J. woman must remove an...»Reply #4