Sable Communications of California v. FCC
| Sable Communications of California v. Federal Communications Commission | |
|---|---|
| Argued April 19, 1989 Decided June 23, 1989 | |
| Full case name | Sable Communications of California, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, et al. |
| Citations | 492 U.S. 115 (more) 109 S. Ct. 2829; 106 L. Ed. 2d 93; 1989 U.S. LEXIS 3135; 57 U.S.L.W. 4920; 66 Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 969; 16 Media L. Rep. 1961 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California |
| Holding | |
| Since the First Amendment does not protect obscene speech, the ban was legitimate. However, sexual expression that is simply indecent is protected. Therefore, banning adult access to indecent messages "far exceeds that which is necessary" to shield minors from dial-a-porn services. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | White, joined by unanimous (parts I, II, IV); Rehnquist, Blackmun, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy (part III) |
| Concurrence | Scalia |
| Concur/dissent | Brennan, joined by Marshall, Stevens |
Sable Communications of California v. Federal Communications Commission, 492 U.S. 115 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the definition of "indecent material" and whether it is protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court invalidated part of a federal law that prohibited "dial-a-porn" telephone messaging services by making it a crime to transmit commercial telephone messages that were either "obscene" or "indecent".