| Revision as of 09:42, 15 January 2008 edit71.41.210.146 (talk) Let's do a proper article and not a redirect. Still pretty short, but there's something there.← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:47, 15 January 2008 edit undo71.41.210.146 (talk) Added a SCOTUSCase sidebar and a bunch of categories. I could use a SubmitDate for the sidebar if someone can find it. And more references.Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{SCOTUSCase | |||
| ⚫ | '''One, Inc. v. Olesen''' {{ussc|355|371|January 13, 1958}} was a landmark decision for ]. ], a spinoff of the ], published the early pro-gay "ONE |
||
| |Litigants=One, Inc. v. Olesen | |||
| |SubmitDate=<!--Can anyone find this? It wasn't argued, so there is no ArgueDate--> | |||
| |SubmitYear= | |||
| |DecideDate=January 13 | |||
| |DecideYear=1958 | |||
| |FullName= One, Incorporated, v. Otto K. Olesen, Postmaster of the City of Los Angeles | |||
| |USVol=355 | |||
| |USPage=371 | |||
| |Citation=241 F.2d 772 (9th Cir. 1957) | |||
| |Subsequent= | |||
| |Holding=Pro-homosexual writing is not ''per se'' obscene. | |||
| |SCOTUS=1957-1958 | |||
| |PerCuriam=yes | |||
| |Prior=Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | |||
| }} | |||
| ⚫ | '''''One, Inc. v. Olesen''''' {{ussc|355|371|January 13, 1958}} was a landmark decision for ]. ], a spinoff of the ], published the early pro-gay "ONE: The Homosexual Magazine" beginning in ]. After a campaign of harassment from the ] and ], the ] of ] declared the October, ] issue obscene therefore unmailable under the ]. | ||
| ⚫ | To the surprise of all concerned, an appeal to the ] was not only accepted, but citing ] |
||
| ⚫ | The magazine sued. The first court decision (March 1956) sided with the post office, as did the ] (February 1957). To the surprise of all concerned, an appeal to the ] was not only accepted, but citing ] {{ussc|354|476|]}} the Court, in a terse ], reversed the 9th Circuit without even waiting for oral arguments. This marked the first time the Supreme Court had explicitly ruled on homosexuality. | ||
| == References == | == References == | ||
| Line 8: | Line 25: | ||
| * {{Citation |url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_2001_July/ai_76751693 |title=Review: Courting Justice |first=Stephanie |last=Mencimer |periodical=Washington Monthly |date=July, 2001 |issn=0043-0633 |accessdate=2008-01-14}}, describing | * {{Citation |url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_2001_July/ai_76751693 |title=Review: Courting Justice |first=Stephanie |last=Mencimer |periodical=Washington Monthly |date=July, 2001 |issn=0043-0633 |accessdate=2008-01-14}}, describing | ||
| ** {{Citation |title=Courting Justice: Gay Men and Lesbians v. the Supreme Court |first1=Joyce |last1=Murdoch |first2=Deb |last2=Price |isbn=0465015131 |pages=582 |date=April 30, 2001 |publisher=Basic Books |place=New York}} (not referenced for this article, but it should be) | ** {{Citation |title=Courting Justice: Gay Men and Lesbians v. the Supreme Court |first1=Joyce |last1=Murdoch |first2=Deb |last2=Price |isbn=0465015131 |pages=582 |date=April 30, 2001 |publisher=Basic Books |place=New York}} (not referenced for this article, but it should be) | ||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| *{{Citation |title=Homosexuality and Free Speech: The 1958 ONE Case |url=http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/09/13/1331/ |periodical=Eric Rasmusen's Weblog |first=Eric |last=Rasmusen |date=September 13, 2006 |accessdate=2008-01-14}} | |||
| *{{Citation |url=http://www.law.fsu.edu/Journals/lawreview/backissues/244.html |title=Privacy Jurisprudence and the Aparthied of the Closet, 1946–1961 |author=William N. Eskridge, Jr. |periodical= Florida State University Law Review |year=1997 |volume=24 |issue=4 |accessdate=2008-01-14}} "The Post Office determined that the October 1954 issue was obscene and lewd, based upon three articles within the issue: (1) Sappho Remembered, a story of a lesbian's affection for a twenty-year-old "girl" who gives up her boyfriend to live with the lesbian, was considered obscene because it was "lustfully stimulating to the average homosexual reader"; (2) Lord Samuel and Lord Montagu, a poem about homosexual toilet cruising on the part of several British peers, was considered obscene because of "filthy words" within it; and (3) an advertisement for The Circle, a magazine containing homosexual pulp romance stories, was thought to lead the reader to obscene material." | |||
| *{{Citation |url=http://www.planetout.com/news/history/archive/08021999.html |title=''One'' Magazine |first=David |last=Bianco |date=August 2, 1999 |periodical=Planet Out |accessdate=2008-01-14}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 10:47, 15 January 2008
1958 United States Supreme Court case| One, Inc. v. Olesen | |
|---|---|
 Supreme Court of the United States | |
| Decided January 13, 1958 | |
| Full case name | One, Incorporated, v. Otto K. Olesen, Postmaster of the City of Los Angeles |
| Citations | 355 U.S. 371 (more)241 F.2d 772 (9th Cir. 1957) |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
| Holding | |
| Pro-homosexual writing is not per se obscene. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Per curiam | |
One, Inc. v. Olesen 355 U.S. 371 (January 13, 1958) was a landmark decision for LGBT rights in the United States. ONE, Inc., a spinoff of the Mattachine Society, published the early pro-gay "ONE: The Homosexual Magazine" beginning in 1953. After a campaign of harassment from the United States Postal Service and FBI, the Postmaster of Los Angeles declared the October, 1954 issue obscene therefore unmailable under the Comstock laws.
The magazine sued. The first court decision (March 1956) sided with the post office, as did the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (February 1957). To the surprise of all concerned, an appeal to the Supreme Court was not only accepted, but citing Roth v. United States 354 U.S. 476 (1957) the Court, in a terse per curiam decision, reversed the 9th Circuit without even waiting for oral arguments. This marked the first time the Supreme Court had explicitly ruled on homosexuality.
References
- 355 U.S. 371 (January 13, 1958)
- Burroway, Jim (January 13, 2008), "Today In History: A Spunky ONE And The U.S. Post Office", Box Turtle Bulletin, retrieved 2008-01-14
- Mencimer, Stephanie (July, 2001), "Review: Courting Justice", Washington Monthly, ISSN 0043-0633, retrieved 2008-01-14
{{citation}}: Check date values in:|date=(help), describing- Murdoch, Joyce; Price, Deb (April 30, 2001), Courting Justice: Gay Men and Lesbians v. the Supreme Court, New York: Basic Books, p. 582, ISBN 0465015131 (not referenced for this article, but it should be)
- Index of ONE Magazine issues
- Homosexuality and Free Speech: The 1958 ONE Case
- Rasmusen, Eric (September 13, 2006), "Homosexuality and Free Speech: The 1958 ONE Case", Eric Rasmusen's Weblog, retrieved 2008-01-14
- William N. Eskridge, Jr. (1997), "Privacy Jurisprudence and the Aparthied of the Closet, 1946–1961", Florida State University Law Review, vol. 24, no. 4, retrieved 2008-01-14 "The Post Office determined that the October 1954 issue was obscene and lewd, based upon three articles within the issue: (1) Sappho Remembered, a story of a lesbian's affection for a twenty-year-old "girl" who gives up her boyfriend to live with the lesbian, was considered obscene because it was "lustfully stimulating to the average homosexual reader"; (2) Lord Samuel and Lord Montagu, a poem about homosexual toilet cruising on the part of several British peers, was considered obscene because of "filthy words" within it; and (3) an advertisement for The Circle, a magazine containing homosexual pulp romance stories, was thought to lead the reader to obscene material."
- Bianco, David (August 2, 1999), "One Magazine", Planet Out, retrieved 2008-01-14