A. The proper community standards should be those of the state, not the town.

1. A critically acclaimed movie that had received many awards opened in a small town founded and dominated by a fundamentalist religious group that remained very conservative on “social issues”—far more so than any other community in the state. The film portrayed nudity and had scenes involving sexuality, but the advertising for the film was quite tasteful and focused on the fact that the film had received seven nominations for Oscars. The state has a statute forbidding obscene literature and films. The town attorney sought in injunction to prohibit the theater owner from showing the movie because of its portrayal of nudity and discussion of sexuality. The owner appeared in opposition to the injunction application. What is the owner’s best defense?

2. A. The proper community standards should be those of the state, not the town.

3. B. The film has some redeeming social value.

4. C. The state cannot enforce a particular set of religious beliefs.

5. D. The film has proven serious artistic merit.

6. A. The proper community standards should be those of the state, not the town. The Court has not specified what the appropriate community is, but this alternative makes no reference to the three obscenity criteria that the Supreme Court has announced.

7. B. The film has some redeeming social value. This misstates the correct test, which is “whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” The Oscar nominations demonstrate that the film has that.

8. C. The state cannot enforce a particular set of religious beliefs. The state is not enforcing religious beliefs; it is enforcing the anti-obscenity statute. The fact that some religious groups agree does not make the statute unconstitutional.

9. D. The film has serious artistic merit. Easily the best of the four answers. The government has no basis for saying that award-winning and Oscar-nominated films lack serious artistic merit.