TEST 4 NOTES Obscenity and the Media Government Responsibilities ∙ “Domestic tranquility” ∙ General welfare ∙ If you want to learn more check out illiad uic
We also discuss several other topics like What is the last thing that animals want to do?
If you want to learn more check out .08206
We also discuss several other topics like what is the purpose of the specialized cells that produce strong odors from the corpse flower?
If you want to learn more check out give me liberty chapter 15 outline
We also discuss several other topics like If the Earth had no tilt, how many seasons would there be?
Blessings of liberty ∙ These quality of life mandates lead to laws involving health and welfare of community Obscenity, pornography threat ∙ Public morals ∙ Family Organization o Undermine family values ∙ Other social institutions ∙ Therefore we have laws that reach out and protect the society at large Historical Examples ∙ Socrates, 399BC o Socrates was arrested for corrupting the youth o For teaching them to ask questions, to challenge authorities, and challenged old laws ∙ Edwards Gibbons Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire ∙ Will & Ariel Durant Story of Civilization o Attribute the downfall of Rome and other civilization to declining moral and the disintegration of family o Said that Rome became an entertainment society o Family values eroded Obscenity, courts mediate free press vs. public welfare disputes ∙ Courts or legislature has to define obscenity ∙ Establish who will set the standards The Hicklin Rule ∙ Comes from 1868 British case, Regina v. Hicklin (US did not have a rule previous to this) ∙ Only standard we had until Roth in 1957 ∙ Given by Lord Chief Justice Cockburn (“Coburn”) ∙ Rule: Matter is obscene “If the tendency of the matter… is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences and into whose hands a publication of this sort might fall.” (If a child gets his or her hands on it and it corrupts them or has a tendency to do so then it is seen as obscene.) Problems with Hicklin TEST 4 NOTES ∙ Even a few passages endangering children or other sensitive folk would doom entire work ∙ Among those banned under Hicklin were James Joyce’s Ulysses, Dreiser’s An American Tragedy, Moll Flanders ∙ Even the Holy Bible has passages that fail the Hicklin test Comstock Law ∙ US Congress passes law in 1873 ∙ Imposes up to $5,000 fine and 5 years in prison ∙ Enforced through Post Office ∙ Can’t mail any “obscene, lewd, lascivious, indecent, filthy or vile article, matter, thing, device or substance.” Important Obscenity cases Roth v. US (1957) (Publishers) ∙ It was the first time SC hears a case where the 1st amendment is in conflict with obscene material ∙ Took it in part saying that the Hicklin rule condemned American adults to read only that which was fit for children, Hicklin rule took from adults redeeming literature ∙ Could be seen an judicial activism ∙ Samuel Roth who was a publisher, sent obscenity through the mail ∙ Got convicted through lower courts ∙ His case was put together by David Alberts in Beverly Hills, he had obscene books for sales ∙ The court sent out a message when they grouped the cases together ∙ Roth pleaded that it encroached on his 1st, 9th, and 10th amendment rights ∙ Question: Is obscene material protected by the first amendment? What is obscene material? ∙ SC: 6 to 3 court; obscenity is NOT protected speech ∙ Trying to define what is obscenity the court has a struggle, took the court a decade to come up with the answer ∙ Courts: Sex and obscenity are not the same, sexual manners depicted in arts, literature, or science do not deprive them of safeguards; something is obscene if the average person applying community standards finds that the works appeals to prurient (inspires to lust) interests ROTH TEST ∙ Jury can be considered as the average society ∙ Roth test is incorporated in the test we use today Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure v. Massachusetts (1966) (The actual publication) ∙ John Clelland’s 1749 classicTEST 4 NOTES o AKA Fanny Hill : Fanny is the main character of the story o Massachusetts case inspired broad defense ∙ The book tells the story of a young woman cast adrift in 18th century England, the novel is considered a classic of erotic literature, was even banned in Massachusetts ∙ Putnam & Sons start distributing it again in 1963, Massachusetts condemned it again ∙ Massachusetts does not want the book anywhere on the shelves ∙ English professors testified that it was a classic of literature ∙ SC: 6 to 3, reverse the Mass. Decision; added 2 new dimensions to the Roth test o something is obscene if the material is patently offensive because it affronts contemporary standards relating to sexual matters o “utterly without redeeming social value”, the book has redeeming social value, if the work had redeeming value ∙ Pandering Test: If you promote the book for its salacious (juicy) content, it is pandering (pimping), it is no longer protected Stanley v. Georgia (1969) ∙ Deal with the question of possession, is it illegal to possess obscene material? ∙ Georgia had a law that made it illegal to possess obscene material ∙ Stanley was arrested after police got a search warrant for his home, he was suspected of running a gambling operation ∙ While the police were searching for gambling materials, they turned up 3 films that were for sure obscene, ∙ Question: Whether the law was a violation of first amendment rights? ∙ ISSUE: Mere private possession ∙ SC: Georgia law was unconstitutional; mere private possession cannot constitutionally be made a crime Miller v. California (1973) ∙ People are willing to pay money in order to possess the obscene material ∙ Miller and mother receive obscene material in the mail, took it to the cops, cops arrested Miller for violating a law against distributing obscene material ∙ Trial court found miller guilty, state appeals confirmed conviction ∙ SC: 5 member majority; to a definition of obscenity. Court upholds the California decision ∙ Miller/Roth Test: (Still go by this today) o Same as part 1 of Roth test o The work in question depicts or describes in a patently offensive way sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law (varies state by state) o SLAPS test: the work as a whole lacks Serious Literary Artistic Political or Scientific value Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton (1973)TEST 4 NOTES ∙ What about private clubs or theatres that say adults only? ∙ DA from Atlanta (Slaton) filed a suit to prevent the showing of adult films “Magic Mirror” & “It all comes out in the end” ∙ Theatre argued that the Stanley case had established private possession ∙ The judge says that the content is obscene, and that you cant prevent exhibition of consenting adults in the confines of a commercial theatre (original rulings) ∙ Slaton appeals and Georgia SC overturns ruling and sided with Slaton ∙ SC: 5 to 4 decision; decision sided with Georgia SC saying there are legitimate state interests in stemming the tide of commercial obscenity; brings back arguments of quality and life and public safety issues ∙ Courts said adultonly restriction is not good enough; said sates have the power of restricting showing of obscene material if they define the behavior explicitly; “Obscenity has no sanctuary behind doors marked adults only.” Illinois Citizens Committee for Broadcasting v. FCC (1974) ∙ Broadcasting fined for encouraging female listeners to discuss experiences with oral sex ∙ FCC fined Saunderland ∙ Group of people got together to say that they like the show, challenged the FCC’s authority ∙ Federal appeals court says the fine is good, say that the FCC has a right to fine broadcasters; mention the time of day that the broadcast occurs, if you want to put salacious content on the airwaves, you have to wait until kiddies go to bed FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (1978) ∙ Pacifica played a broadcast that had the 7 words you can never say on television ∙ This was played in the middle of the afternoon ∙ A young father was driving his son to a little league practice when it was on the news ∙ Brought forth an action bringing forth the idea ∙ The man complained and it went through all the FCC channels ∙ SC: This speech was not obscene and it did not meet the Miller standard, but the speech was however indecent. Broadcasting enjoys the most limited first amendment protections of all media. ∙ FCC has a standard on indecent things saying that they have to be broadcast in the safe harbor time New York v. Ferber (1982) ∙ Kiddie porn, the use of children in the creating of pornographic material ∙ By 1977 traffic in kiddie porn provided for prosecution of individuals who ∙ NY Legislature had a law against using children in pornographic films ∙ What a age constitutes to be a child? ∙ NY law said that a child cap was at the age of 16TEST 4 NOTES ∙ States can go beyond the limits of miller to protect children Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986) ∙ Student body election, deals with the school right to monitor the speeches of students during their campaign speeches ∙ Fraser had been warned not to use vulgar language, he was suspended from school for 3 days, could not speak at graduation ∙ SC: 7 to 2 decision supports the school district, said Fraser’s comments were obscene and lewd, and said that Frasers speech undermined the school’s basic educational mission, the speech was not political Reno v. ACLU (1997) ∙ Congress passes the Communications Decency act of 1996 o The act made it a crime to show the images to anyone under the age of 18 ∙ SC: Unanimously holds that the CDA’s transmission unlawfully abridged the freedom of speech protected by the 1st amendment ∙ The hosting company cannot be held responsible for thing that is indecent to the public, have to sue whoever put the material out Advertising Law Historically, advertising fell under law of contracts ∙ In 1st amendment realm. Exiled with obscenity, fighting words, sedition ∙ Into 20th century “caveat emptor” – all parties on equal ground ∙ Two laws began to change the status o Pure Food & Drug Act of 1906 – were given the power of regulating labeling o Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 – were given the right to regulate advertising claims in general Courts in second half of 20th century produce 4 themes ∙ Advertising – commercial speech, entitled to some 1st amendment protection ∙ Role of FTC in regulating advertising deception peaked in 1970s ∙ Media have right to refuse advertising for product or cause ∙ Corporations have right to sped funds on ads to influence public opinion Important cases testing rights and limits for advertising Valentine v. Chrestensen (1942) ∙ Chrestensen had a submarineTEST 4 NOTES ∙ There was a law in new York against passing out handbills advertising something ∙ Chrestensen says that first amendment rights are being curtailed ∙ SC: The city has a right to regulate commercial speech Times v. Sullivan (1964) ∙ Full page ad in the New York times ∙ At least on matters of public concern, commercial speech is protected Pittsburg Press Co. v. Pittsburg Commission on Human Rights (1973) ∙ Deals with provisions of the civil rights act ∙ Pittsburg press carried want ads for men and women specifically ∙ They were accused of their ads discriminating gainst gender ∙ The court upheld the Commission on Human Rights saying that it was discriminating, because the ads were engaging and abiding illegal practices. Bigelow v. Virginia (1975) ∙ Bigelow was an underground editor for the underground newspaper at the University of Virginia ∙ The newspaper carried an ad for an abortion clinic that was legal in New York but not Virginia ∙ The speech was protected because they were advertising legal practices. Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Citizens under Consumer council, Inc. (1976) ∙ Virginia had a law that made it unprofessional to advertise price of prescription drugs ∙ The consumer was a blind buyer ∙ Citizen groups challenged the rule on behalf of daily prescription users ∙ Claimed that there is a first amendment right to this certain kind of information ∙ SC: 7 to 1 court decision, there is no 1st amendment exception for purely commercial speech, speech is at least protected if you’re advertising a legal product or service First National Bank of Boston v. Belotti (1978) ∙ Nov. 1976 there was a referendum on a ballot in Mass. Advocating for a graduated income tax for the state, 3rd time the issue was on the ballot ∙ Was opposed by business interests ∙ Can a corporation take the funds of the public and apply them to political campaigns? YES ∙ Court struck down Massachusetts law for doing that; political debate is absolute FTC v. ColgatePalmolive (1965)TEST 4 NOTES ∙ Aka the rapid shave case ∙ This led to advertisers to use mock ups their products on television ∙ Employed an advertising company for an advertising campaign ∙ FTC took that campaign and tried to reproduce what they saw on tv, filed a deceptive advertising campaign, said that CP did not even use sandpaper ∙ Argued that they had to use the Plexiglas ∙ SC: Rules against the Bates adv. Co saying that it was deceptive advertising o Standard: Using props or mock ups is not deceptive per se, deception involves using mock ups to substantiate a product’s characteristics; undisclosed use of props is deception WarnerLambert Co. v. FTC (1977) ∙ Students Opposed to Unfair Practices ∙ The bowl was pre filled with marbles, and it wasn’t shown in the commercial ∙ The SOUP wrote a paper and sent it to the FTC ∙ FTC takes on ∙ Listerine had been using the same formula since 1879, in 1921 they started advertising listerning in preventing colds ∙ FTC studied the claims and took no action until 1972, they study led to a formal complaint, Warner asked for a hearing that lasted 4 months and produced 2,0000 pages of testimony ∙ An administrative law judge upheld the complaint against warner lambert, WL appealed to the FTC, FTC upheld the complaint ∙ FTC found that it kills many bacteria but does not kill others, the case went to federal appeals court, and wound up supporting 21 the action of the FTC ∙ The FTC order was that the warner lambert had to go into corrective advertising “contrary to previous advertising..” they had to do so until they spent an advertising sum equal to the one that they had spent in the 10 preceding years ∙ Can the FTC order corrective advertising? YES o In one case they drove a company to closing Central Hudson…v. Public Service Commission (1980) ∙ In 1973 &1974 there was an oil crisis, we were under a restriction from OPEC ∙ The NY Public service commission passed an ordinance for bidding any advertising by utility companies to promote the use of electricity rather than oil ∙ Central Hudson challenged the ordinance based on first right amendments ∙ Lower courts sustained the Public service commission ∙ SC: overturns, the restriction in this case was more extensive than the necessary to serve the public interest ∙ Govt. Agency must pass if they are going to limit speech ∙ Central Hudson testTEST 4 NOTES o The advertisement must be for a lawful activity and must not be misleading o There must be a substantial government interest at stake o The regulation must directly advance the government interest o The regulation must not be more extensive than necessary to serve the public interest Bates v. State Bar of Arizona (1977) ∙ Like the Nebraska v. Stuart case, the courts relied on a professional code of ethics to handle matters ∙ They ran an ad in the newspaper that violated the cannons of the American Bar Association ∙ The state bar president, charged the lawyers with soliciting clients in violation of the code of ethics that said they couldn’t solicit clients through the use of advertising ∙ They challenged that and there was a hearing and the committee recommended that they be suspended from the bar for 6 months, they challenged it in court, the state court reduced their suspension to censure ∙ SC: threw out the case, said that a ban on advertising violates the first amendment, informative ads that are not false, deceptive or misleading are protected speech, the middle class had hesitated to seek legal advice, and therefore the type of advertising provided an important information service. Posadas de Puerto Rico v. Tourism Co. of Puerto Rico (1986) ∙ Stands for the proposition that a regulated product can be regulated in any medium under the relaxed scrutiny of the central Hudson test ∙ Advertising for a casino, gambling had been legal in PR since 1948, but the advertising of gambling to the public in PR was not legal ∙ The SC upheld the tourism company; cited the Hudson test saying that there was a distinct public interest in public welfare at hand (substantial government interest) Village of Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates (1982) ∙ The main issue: Whether zoning regulations forbidding the sale of certain materials without a license violate commercial speech guarantees ∙ For one reason or another licensing speech has to be strictly scrutinized ∙ Chicago had an ordinance that any business needed to get a license to sell items that are designed to be used with marijuana or other drugs ∙ They challenged the ordinance saying that it limited its speech, DC upheld the ordinance, appeals court reversed on the claims of commercial speech ∙ SC: It is speech promoting illegal activity so they upheld the district court decisionTEST 4 NOTES Historically a 20th Century arena ∙ Federal Communications Act of 1934 o Airwaves are a public resource o Radio frequencies are limited number o Government licenses granted in the “public interest, convenience, and necessity” o They are granted to those who request them and demonstrate that they are going to serve the public interest ∙ WLW called itself the nation’s station, they had 500 watts of power (it is 10x the power of the most powerful station today) 2 Provisions of FCA focal ∙ 315 “Equal opportunity” or equal time comes into play during elections o Once they offer advertising to one, they must offer it equally to all (in the case of candidates) o Until just a few years ago, there was an unwritten rule that the election season started in March, and now has started more than a ∙ “Fairness Doctrine” suggests proactive role in serving public interest ∙ A station may refuse time to everyone or nobody, but not to somebody Rise of radio produces rules ∙ In depression, only entertainment for many who couldn’t afford movies ∙ WWII network broadcasts riveting for audiences o Hitler’s rallies were broadcast live o They even broadcasted invasions ∙ Sports alive: boxing, college football, and World Series ∙ Two nets become three under demand for sports and entertainment Cases on Broadcast Rules NBC v. US (1943) ∙ At first there were no networks, they evolved through feeding the monster ∙ They held 73 days of hearings trying to ascertain what was going on ∙ A new network called Mutual emerged and won the contract to broadcast the world series ∙ A lot of people couldn’t get the world series ∙ The FCC said that if they broadcasted things that were against ∙ The new rule said: Any station who was party to a network contract containing any of the violations would not have their license renewedTEST 4 NOTES ∙ 8 abuses of the public interest: o There will be no exclusive contracts o Other stations have to be able to carry network programming o (FCC didn’t like the length of contract, 5 years long) Said that this was unfair business practice, the maximum license is going to be 2 years o (FCC: news from New York didn’t benefit those from Lubbock) Proposed that the number of mandatory hours be cut back, so that they could serve the public interest o (Locals became captive of the networks, let advertisers dictate program content) Give local stations the right to refuse any program that they wanted to refuse o Networks can only own one station per market and they would later decide on the total number that they could own o 2 networks under one ownership is one too many (ABC emerged) o NBC even controlled the advertising rates that the stations could charge for their locals, local stations should be free to charge whatever they wanted to charge ∙ NBC & CBS asked a federal court to nullify the administrative law, argued that the law had gone above it power ∙ Federal court dismissed the case ∙ SC: FCC had been given expansive powers ad in order to protect the public interest, the FCC can impose reasonable regulations on broadcasting consistent with the powers given to them by congress United Church of Crist v. FCC (1966) ∙ Station WLBT in Jackson Miss. Put on the air segregationists racist programming ∙ The united church of Christ joined in monitoring the program ∙ When the license came up for renewal they asked the FCC to hear its case, the commission had never heard a case like this before ∙ They refused to hear the group, however the FCC did take note of the complaints in writing, issues a one year renewal. ∙ Asked for the federal appeals court order asking them to intervene ∙ Said that viewers have a financial state in the station ∙ They had spend money buying television sets ∙ If viewers could intervene at the time of contract renewals it would entice people t ∙ FCC could act as an unofficial umpire ∙ The Court revoked the 1 year license renewed it (SC agreed) ∙ This changed the license renewal process , people can intervene and Red Lion Broadcasting v. FCC (1969) ∙ Case that test the fairness doctrine ∙ When an offensive remark was made they had to be given an opportunity to reply ∙ Billy J called Fred Cook a Communist SympathizerTEST 4 NOTES ∙ Hargis attacked Cook on air ∙ Cook demanded right to reply ∙ SC: put the 2 cases together, upheld a Washington DC court, 8 to 0 opinion, 1st amendment rights to viewers and listeners is paramount, they upheld the right to reply o People have a right to access the broadcaster has to present a wide array of opinions on matters of public interest o Chilling effect – the decision wound up having the opposite effect because broadcasters began to steer away from anything controversial CBS v. Democratic National Committee (1973) ∙ The networks refused to sell network time ∙ The groups asked the FCC for a ruling based on the fairness doctrine ∙ The FCC is not convinced that they had an absolute right, upheld the network decision to refuse time ∙ The federal appeals overturned the FCC, and ordered the FCC to write a rule guaranteeing people access; rule to specify how many editorial advertisement should be aired ∙ SC: Such a rule giving the FCC such power over advertising would put them in a position to control rather than to regulate content o Under the FCC broadcasters are able to use their discretions in choosing who can advertise o The public interest is not served by forcing broadcaster to receive paid advertising. o The government is not to decide content Paulsen v. FCC (1974) ∙ Paulsen was a comedian and he was most wellknown for appearing on the smothers brother’s comedy house ∙ Because of the popularity; he was very ∙ The FCC and the Federal court of appeals said that airing the show produced a problem against the equal time provision ∙ Paulsen said that they were discriminating against performers ∙ Court said that as soon as you show up during election season all other candidates have equal time Kennedy for President v. FCC (1918) ∙ Teddy Kennedy v. Carter for the democratic vote ∙ Kennedy argued that he should be given free time ∙ Appeals said that they were covering the news because the president was news, the law does not present against a candidateTEST 4 NOTES CBS v. FCC (1981) ∙ The carter mondell campaign wanted to buy time in the fall off 1979 for the 1980 presidential campaign ∙ Said that it would play havoc with their existing programming and that it was too early ∙ Claimed that they were denied reasonable access ∙ SC: Networks may not decide when the campaign season begins and ends, however they may give logical reasons to deny time, there would be a likelihood there would be a time request by rival candidates Prometheus Radio v. FCC (2004) ∙ By 1987 the FCC said that it was no longer enforcing the fairness doctrine ∙ Said that deregulation had gone too far Telecommunications act of 1996 ∙ Congress regulates violence on TV ∙ Demands vchip o Congress telling the FCC what they are going to do o Every TV made after 1998 should have the vchip included o Allows parents from prohibiting children from watching certain kinds of things ∙ Leads to TV ratings system (TV14 etc.) Unique concerns for Cable ∙ Rights of way for cable o You cannot just string cables over a person’s home ∙ Content evolves: o Rebroadcast o Syndicated o Satellite ∙ Must carry rules o FCC gives people a license to broadcast and get rights to broadcast o Rights of way are owned by the city o Satellite one of the things that they have to carry is the local TV stations Cases for Cable Capital Cities cable v Crisp (1984) ∙ OK at the time was a dry state and it was illegal to advertise alcoholic beverages ∙ State waned cable companies to block out any advertising from out of state ∙ State of Oklahoma wanted to regulate based on the fact that ∙ SC: Ruled in favor of the cable company, only the FCC has the TEST 4 NOTES ∙ Government doesn’t get involved in regulating content, they put the regulation of the content under scrutiny Los Angeles v. Preferred (1986) ∙ Preferred communications asked the area ∙ City of LA issued a franchise, said that they should go to the auction to string cable across the city ∙ DC dismissed the whole case ∙ Appeals says that ∙ Sherman antitrust grounds they hear the case ∙ SC: aid that maybe there is 1st amendment concern, the moment that cable operator start producing their own content now they have first amendment protection ∙ Established that an cable company or satellite company that generates any new content is protected by the first amendment Media business and trusts A 2 part question ∙ Do government regulations which apply to other businesses apply as well to media organizations? ∙ Or, through the First Amendment do those businesses enjoy freedom from government regulation? A Few Key laws ∙ Sherman act (1890) o Aimed primarily at standard oil o Any company that engages in anticompetitive practices is messing with the law ∙ Clayton Antitrust Ac t(1914) o Applies to advertising companies ∙ Newspaper preservation act Significant Mediabusiness cases Associated Press v. US (1945) ∙ Marshall Field has a newspaper called the Chicago morning sun ∙ McCormick has a newspaper called the Chicago Tribune ∙ When field applies for the AP, McCormick vetoes the request on grounds that the person that is in the sane market had vetoe ∙ US Justice department files against the AP a Sherman antitrust ac lawsuit saying that it was anticompetitiveTEST 4 NOTES ∙ AP actions presented a clear and present danger to vital government interest (competition in the marketplace, and the free flow of information ∙ Businesses cannot hid behind the first amendment when their actions are illegal Lorain Journal Co. v. U.S. (1951) ∙ Newspaper saw the radio as a competitor and then refused to ∙ People that were not included in the newspaper they cold ∙ SC: The newspaper’s practice is predatory and anticompetitive, designed to create a monopoly ∙ They had to pay the radio station compensatory in damages, they also had to pay punitive damages Kansas City Star Co. v. US (1957) ∙ Quite similar to the Lorraine case ∙ The Kansas city star engaged in force packaging ∙ Under this agreement a competing newspaper said bankrupt ∙ Justice dept. said that it was anticompetitive ∙ They were considering criminal prosecution of the officers ∙ Rather than face criminal proceedings it enters into a consent decree o Star company agrees o the degree but not consenting s o Had to get rid of the TV and the radio station, can\not buy Kansas city broadcast without getting approval and could no longer force to get people to et publications U.S. v. Times Mirror Co. (1967) ∙ Otis Chandler and his family owned the LA Times ∙ They would buy smaller newspapers and would eventually just make them into part of the LA times ∙ Justice department was not happy about it, especially when the Chandler’s announced that they were going to but the San Bernadino Sun and Telegram for $15 million ∙ The justice department says that they cannot buy it ∙ TIMES argued that it was a different market and a different community ∙ SC; Sustained the lower courts, said that they had 060 days to get rid of the newspaper and had to guarantee that the terms were such that the y would still be successful Citizen Publishing Co. v. US (1969) ∙ 2 newspapers in Tucson star and entered a Joint operating agreement, morning and night would guaranteed to show up daily and whole ∙ They would share the printing press ∙ One owner said that he wanted to buy the other newspaper ∙ Anyone on the planet can buy the star, because it would put competing newspapers in the hands of one individualTEST 4 NOTES ∙ Give special protection to the joint operating agreements, but they are not ok if you do profit pooling ∙ Passed the newspaper preservation act, preserves competition Texas Monthly Inc. v. Bullock (1989) ∙ They collect taxes whenever you buy a copy ∙ Religious periodicals are exempt from paying general state sales tax ∙ Texas monthly tried to add religious articles to try and argue that they were religious ∙ State law discriminated on the base of content and it violated the separation clause in the 1st amendment ∙ SC: 6 to 3, The exemption was invalid on separation grounds, the Texas law was null and void