Did the surpeme court forget it ruled pornography is legal and protected under 1st attendant?

Supreme Court once ruled that slavery and segregation were legal

>>936383804 (OP)
The supreme court just ruled heads Trump wins, tales dems lose. The US has no laws Trump and his cronies are bound to respect. This is what you voted for.

>>936383804 (OP)
Yeah, but won't anyone think of the children?!?

>>936384209
>tales
esl nigger

>>936384376
they can put up a flag that says pedophilia is illegal just don't put the flag up unless you're a registered anon lol.

>>936383804 (OP)
no, no they did not.
you dun gooned too much man, your brains turned to mush. you're seeing porn everywhere.

>>936386934
Supreme Court precedents have protected access by adults to non-obscene sexual content on First Amendment grounds.

>>936387062
cite a case

>>936387111

Obscene material that goes against Federal Law – 18 U.S. Code § 1460–1470 is illegal, but adult pornography is protected First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

For example a computer user creates a digital image of a little girl having sexual intercourse with dog that would classed as obscene and would be illegal.

>>936387111
Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973)
FLYNT v. OHIO, 451 U.S. 619 (1981)

>>936387488
>FLYNT v. OHIO
was protecting parody as free speech.
>Miller v. California
clarifying the legal definition of obscenity, no where does it say you have a first amendment right to porn.

porn is a regulated commodity thats why you can't openly keep those pictures of naked little girls you have stashed on that thumb drive you think no one knows about.

>>936387666
Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973)

"The statute in question is overbroad and thus, unconstitutional."

>>936387809
im missing the logical link you are making from a porn distributer being alowed to distribute a regulated product to you being enshrined by the first amendment to have unfettered access to said product?

>>936387953
>regulated product
Nope.

>>936388194
that'll work..

>>936388258
I mean I wasn't the person you were arguing with, but the government isn't exactly making porn to regulate in the first place

>>936383878
I’d take that Supreme Court over the criminals we have today. Complete disgrace to the office

>>936384521
I noticed that instead of attacking his statement, you just insulted him for a typo. You righties tend to do that A LOT

>>936388384
they arent making shitty beer either, but they regulate that.

>>936388387
im sure you would

>>936384209
You're goddamn right I voted for it.

>>936389308
Uh.... it's the Rs who bitched at trump about needing those illegals on the farm. There's no such thing as a democrat farmer.

>>936387062
Obscenity laws violate the constitution. Even if it did not the government should not be treating the populace like slaves and should have decency to leave a person the fuck alone without a compelling reason to do otherwise.