STANLEY v. GEORGIA 394 U.S. 557 (1969)

Authorized by a search warrant, federal and state agents entered and searched Stanley's home for evidence of bookmaking activities. Instead they found film, which was used to convict him for possession of obscene material. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that mere possession of obscenity in one's home cannot constitutionally be made a crime.

Prior obscenity decisions had recognized a legitimate state interest in regulating public dissemination of obscene materials. In Stanley, however, the Court recognized two fundamental constitutional rights that outweighed the state interest in regulating obscenity in a citizen's home: the first amendment right to receive information and ideas, regardless of their social worth, and the constitutional right to be free from unwanted government intrusion into one's privacy.

As justification for interfering with these important individual rights, the state asserted the right to protect individuals from obscenity's effects. The Court rejected that argument, viewing such "protection" as an attempt to "control … a person's thoughts," a goal "wholly inconsistent with the philosophy of the First Amendment."

Justices potter j. stewart, william j. brennan, and byron r. white concurred in the result, on the ground that the search and seizure were outside the lawful scope of the officers' warrant, and thus violated Stanley's fourth amendment rights.

Kim Mc l ane Wardlaw
(1986)