•  
  •  
 

Abstract

North Carolina, like other states, has chosen to regulate the dissemination of obscenity through a nuisance abatement statute, Chapter 19 of the General Statutes, as well as through criminal prosecution. The Supreme Court of North Carolina answered the question of whether the state's nuisance abatement statute violates the fourteenth amendment's proscription against the unreasonable curtailment of protected expression in State ex rel. Andrews v. Chateau X, Inc., hereinafter Chateau X-I. The Court compared the practical effect of an injunction issued under Chapter 19 with the effect of a criminal statute and found that Chapter 19 was nothing more than a personalized criminal statute. Because the Chapter 19 injunction imposed the same restrictions which could be constitutionally imposed by a criminal proceeding, the injunction did not operate as an unconstitutional prior restraint on protected expression.

Share

COinS
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.