One, Inc. v. Olesen

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

One, Inc. v. Olesen
Supreme Court of the United States
Submitted June 13, 1957
Decided January 13, 1958
Full case nameOne, Incorporated, v. Otto K. Olesen, Postmaster of the City of Los Angeles
Citations355 U.S. 371 (more)
78 S. Ct. 364; 2 L. Ed. 2d 352
Case history
Prior241 F.2d 772 (9th Cir. 1957)
Holding
Pro-homosexual writing is not per se obscene. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Earl Warren
Associate Justices
John M. Harlan II
William J. Brennan Jr. · Charles E. Whittaker
Case opinion
Per curiam

One, Inc. v. Olesen, 355 U.S. 371 (1958), was a

ONE violated obscenity laws, thus upholding constitutional protection for pro-homosexual writing.[1]

cruising that it said contained "filthy words"; and (3) an advertisement for The Circle, a magazine containing homosexual pulp romance stories, that would direct the reader to other obscene material.[4]

The magazine, represented by a young attorney who had authored the cover story in the October 1954 issue, Eric Julber,

landmark decision in Roth v. United States 354 U.S. 476
(1957), read in its entirety:

241 F.2d 772, reversed.
Eric Julber for petitioner.
Solicitor General Rankin, Acting Assistant Attorney General Leonard and Samuel D. Slade for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reversed. Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476.[8]

On the same day, the court issued a similar per curiam decision also citing Roth in

nudist
magazines.

One, Inc. v. Olesen was the first U.S. Supreme Court ruling to deal with homosexuality[6] and the first to address free speech rights with respect to homosexuality. The justices supporting the reversal were Frankfurter, Douglas, Clark, Harlan, and Whittaker.[3] As an affirmation of Roth, the case itself has proved most important for, in the words of one scholar, "its on-the-ground effects. By protecting ONE, the Supreme Court facilitated the flourishing of a gay and lesbian culture and a sense of community" at the same time as the federal government was purging homosexuals from its ranks.[5]

In its next issue, ONE told its readers: "For the first time in American publishing history, a decision binding on every court now stands. ... affirming in effect that it is in no way proper to describe a love affair between two homosexuals as constitut(ing) obscenity."[5]

See also

References

  1. ISSN 0362-4331
    . Retrieved June 21, 2019.
  2. ^ "History". www.onearchives.org. Retrieved April 9, 2018.
  3. ^
    ISBN 978-0-465-01514-6
    . Retrieved October 9, 2011.
  4. ^ William N. Eskridge Jr. (1997). "Privacy Jurisprudence and the Apartheid of the Closet, 1946–1961". Florida State University Law Review. Archived from the original on May 12, 2008. Retrieved January 14, 2008.
  5. ^
    Carmel, California
    , with his wife.
  6. ^ a b Rauch, Jonathan (February 5, 2014). "The unknown Supreme Court decision that changed everything for gays". Washington Post. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
  7. 9th Cir.
    1957).
  8. ^ One, Inc. v. Oleson, 355 U.S. 371, 372 (1958), citing Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).

Further reading

External links

Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=One,_Inc._v._Olesen&oldid=1168058225"