holding that where United States Supreme Court has ruled on the constitutionality of a state statute governing obscenity, that ruling is binding on state courts
How later courts described this case
- holding that where United States Supreme Court has ruled on the constitutionality of a state statute governing obscenity, that ruling is binding on state courts
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Cohen,
The Supreme Court of the United States held in Grove Press, Inc. v. Gerstein, 378 U.S. 577 , 12 L. Ed. 2d 1035 , 84 S. Ct. 1909 (1964), that it is an unconstitutional abridgement of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States for the State of Florida to enjoin, pursuant to its obscenity statute, the circulation of the book “Tropic of Cancer”. In State v. Huntington, 204 A. 2d 411 (Conn. 1964); Larkin v. G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 14 N.Y. 2d 399 , 200 N.E. 2d 760 (1964); State v. Locks, 97 Ariz. 148 , 397 P. 2d 949 (1964); City of Chicago v. Kimmel, 31 Ill. 2d 202 , 201 N.E. 2d 386 (1964), the courts of those jurisdictions had occasion, subsequent to the Gerstein *72 case, to comment on the book “Tropic of Cancer” and in each instance held Gerstein was controlling and the circulation of the book could not be enjoined.
This Court held in Commonwealth v. Blumenstein, 396 Pa. 417 , 153 A. 2d 227 (1959), that in determining the constitutionality of state obscenity statutes, the decisions of the federal courts are conclusive. Hence, even if we were to conclude that “Tropic of Cancer” is obscene we still would be required to reverse the lower court’s holding since the Supreme Court of the United States has determined that the material involved is constitutionally protected and the circulation of the book may not be enjoined.
Decree reversed.