This study is an empirical analysis of how the fluctuating legal
environment in the courts surrounding obscenity litigation over a
thirty year period is an appropriate vehicle with which to
demonstrate the dynamics of widespread group involvement in the
judicial process. Joseph F. Kobylka traces how the development of
the obscenity law from the 1957 Roth v. United States decision,
which established the proscription of obscenity through its
libertarian interpretation by the Warren court and its
reaffirmation by the 1973 Miller v. California decision,
necessitated changes in both the behaviors and strategies of
libertarian and conservative groups in the active pursuit of their
particular goals.
After a review of the shifts in the Supreme Court's doctrines
concerning obscenity, Kobylka identifies the various political
interest groups, and examines their motives, goals, and the
factors, both internal and external, that determined their
responses to Miller. He concludes with a summary of findings
confirming that the study's empirical approach yields a
comprehensive understanding of the fluidity of group politics.
Specific group involvement is documented in the appendices, and
bibliographies furnish lists of books, articles, and a table of
cases. "The Politics of Obscenity" will be a useful, authoritative
volume for advanced courses in the judicial process and group
politics, and will also be invaluable to academic libraries,
political scientists, and other scholars.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
Welcome to Loot.co.za!
Sign in / Register |Wishlists & Gift Vouchers |Help | Advanced search
