Laserfiche WebLink
Courts interpret the definition of obscenity narrowly because the regulation of <br />obscenity directly regulates the content of speech. A city cannot enact ordinances <br />which define obscenity more broadly. <br />The Minnesota Legislature recognizes that children are particularly vulnerable to the <br />adverse impacts of sexually-oriented materials. As a result, Minnesota law creates <br />another category of materials which is called "harmful to minors." These are any <br />description or representation, in whatever form, of nudity, sexual conduct, sexual <br />excitement, or sadomasochistic abuse when it: <br />1. predominantly appeals to the prurient, shameful or morbid interest of <br />minors; <br />2. is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a <br />whole with respect to wh.^t is suitable material for minors; and <br />3. is utterly without redeeming social importance for minors. <br />Minnesota law prohibits the sale or rental of such materials to children, and these <br />materials cannot be displayed in any place where children are likely to be. Businesses <br />may satisfy the law by placing opaque covers on the materials or by segregating them <br />in a separate area with a sign prohibiting children from entering. <br />ENDNOTES <br />1. Miller v. California, 413 U.S.15 (1973). <br />2. Young v. American Mini-Theatres, Inc., 427 U.S. 50, 70-71 (1976); Central <br />Hudson Gas & Elec. v. Public Service Comm'n, 447 U.S. 537, 562-563 (1980). <br />3. City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 U.S. 41, 46 (1986). <br />4. Id., at 50. <br />5. Id., at 50-52. <br />6. HQ Investments, Inc. v. City of Rochester, 25 F.3d 1413, l<i18 (8th Cir. <br />1994). <br />7. City of Renton, supra at 53. <br />8. Topanga Press, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 989 F.2d 1524, 1529-1531 (9th <br />Cir. 1993); Woodall v. City of E! Paso, 950 F.2d 255, 258-261 (5th Cir. 1992).