Ban for Kids?

Despite its reluctance to uphold censorship, the Supreme Court has more than once hinted that laws carefully and narrowly aimed at creating a ban for juveniles might well be constitutional. Taking the hint, New York State passed a statute in 1965 making it a crime to sell to anyone under 17 any material that presents a salacious view of "nudity, sexual conduct or sado-masochistic abuse." Similarly inspired, Dallas enacted a municipal ordinance empowering a nine-man board to label films as "not suitable for young persons"; movie theaters can be fined $200 for admitting anyone under 16 to such a film unless he is accompanied by a parent or spouse.

Challenges to both laws have now reached the Supreme Court, and last week the nine Justices listened while lawyers for both sides presented oral arguments. The New York case involved the conviction of a store owner for selling four girlie publications, and when Justice Brennan pointed out that two of the magazines--Sir and Escapade--had previously been ruled non-obscene, Prosecutor William Cahn responded that while they may not be obscene to adults, they are to children.

Adults Only? In Dallas, Viva Maria, a Brigitte Bardot-Jeanne Moreau movie, was barred to children. City Attorney N. Alex Bickley conceded that Viva was a "marginal case." But though he might have preferred a clearer example, he argued that it was rightly banned because of a few scenes that might suggest to juveniles that sexual promiscuity was desirable or commonly accepted.

One argument against the laws was based on the contention that the First Amendment is not intended to protect communication for adults only. It was also argued that because of the widely varying maturity of persons of any one age, it was unconstitutional to set an age limit.

The ban was vague, impractical and "absurd" anyway, said Louis Nizer, who appeared for the film industry. He pointed out that eight of Dallas' banned films had subsequently been on television in full view of any twelve-year-old. Adding that six cities were already copying the Dallas law, he asked that it be thrown out. If it is not, he said, it would be an "intolerable burden" on the film industry. The court will hear no further argument on the subject, but will render a decision some time before recessing in June.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.