How did Miller v. California change U.S. obscenity law?

In Miller v. California (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court established a definitive three-part test to determine whether material is obscene and therefore excluded from First Amendment protection. This ruling shifted U.S. obscenity law by providing a framework that relies on "contemporary community standards" rather than a national standard.21

Under the Miller test, material is considered legally obscene only if it meets all three of the following criteria:

• The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to "prurient interest" (an immoral or lustful desire).21
• The work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law.21
• The work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.21

By leaving the interpretation of "community standards" to the discretion of local jurisdictions, the Court allowed for regional variability in the regulation of sexually explicit material. This precedent remains a cornerstone of U.S. law, influencing subsequent cases involving both traditional media and digital communication.21