Constitutional Law: 1st Amendment Free Speech (Pt. 3.3) - Obscenity under Miller v. California
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ย. 2024
- 📚 LAW SCHOOL & BAR EXAM PREP
Law school prep: studicata.com/...
Bar exam prep: studicata.com/...
🤝 CONNECT WITH YOUR INSTRUCTOR
Michael's Instagram: / studicataguy
❤️ COMMUNITY & REVIEWS
Community: studicata.com/...
Testimonials: studicata.com/...
Submit a review: shoutout.studi...
📱 TECH
iOS app: studicata.com/ios
Android app: studicata.com/...
📣 ABOUT
Studicata provides a fresher, more relatable way to prep for law school finals and the bar exam. With top-rated video lectures, exam walkthrough videos, outlines, study guides, strategy guides, essay practice exams, multiple-choice assessments, performance tracking, and more-Studicata has you covered with everything you need to ace your finals and pass the bar exam with confidence.
Email: info@studicata.com
Learn more: studicata.com
🎬 VIDEO INFO
Constitutional Law: 1st Amendment Free Speech (Pt. 3.3) - Obscenity under Miller v. California
Primary sources of law for this video:
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957)
Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973)
Jenkins v. Georgia, 418 U.S. 153 (1974)
Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968)
Ward v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 767 (1977)
Pope v. Illinois, 481 U.S. 497 (1987)
Learn more: studicata.com
I literally love this guy.
Hearing Mike talk about porn on a Monday, who knew my day would end this way
What's the logic behind the statements around 16:00?
... Not to mention the leggings showing camel toe when the honorable elders wearing the same store bought clothes in your society still don't accept skinny jeans, leggings, or tiktok leggings.
Because law is in a constant of evolution, wouldn't the definition of obscenity evolve too?
yes
it's tied to local standards of "morality" so what is obscene in one area may not be in another and what is obscene in one time may not be in another
Yeah, but you’d have to use the current test and definition on a law exam. The Miller test is the current one.