ABSTRACT
HIXSON agrees that pornography falls within the Supreme Court’s definition of obscenity. He provides an historical examination of the Court’s efforts to grapple with appropriate and constitutional limits on the public portrayal of sexuality, acknowledging that every such decision meant a clash between free expression and repugnant materials. He traces the Justices’ thinking from prohibitions based on single offensive passages to considering works as a whole, to basing judgement about obscenity on community standards, to determining whether a work had any redeeming value. Hixson finally comes down on the side of civil liberties. Self expression and self fulfilment must be promoted. Restrictions on free speech should be used only to protect children and nonconsenting adults.
