The author of this student note examines a recent Minneapolis city ordinance that declares pornography to be both subordination of and a form of sex discrimination towards women. First Amendment proponents challenged the ordinance as unconstitutional. The author considers whether the state has a compelling interest in protecting its citizens from civil rights violations, and whether that interest can overcome first amendment rights. The author concludes that pornography is neither a civil rights violation, nor a category of unprotected speech.
Winifred Ann Sandler,
The Minneapolis Anti-Pornography Ordinance: a Valid Assertion of Civil Rights?,
13 Fordham Urb. L.J. 909
Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol13/iss4/3