This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P filed this complaint seeking a declaratory judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 that the adult film 'After Midnight' is not legally obscene in the Western District of Tennessee, and therefore is protected by the First Amendment. P is a non-profit trade association comprised of members who produce, manufacture, distribute, sell, and rent sexually explicit adult videotapes, and that several of its members wished to ship, distribute, sell, and rent the adult film 'After Midnight' in the Western District of Tennessee. P claims that: 1) 'After Midnight' is a sexually explicit adult film; 2) the film would not be considered obscene under the contemporary community standards in the Western District of Tennessee; 3) if the film were to be considered obscene under contemporary community standards, it would subject Adult Video's members to criminal prosecution; 4) the federal authorities regularly enforce the antiobscenity laws in the Western District of Tennessee; 5) this threat of prosecution 'chills' P's First Amendment right to disseminate non-obscene materials; and 6) a declaratory judgment applying the contemporary community standards to 'After Midnight' is appropriate to determine whether the film is constitutionally protected under the First Amendment. D moved to dismiss the complaint on standing and ripeness grounds, arguing that P had not alleged a cognizable injury. The district court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint, holding that Adult Video lacked standing to pursue its claim. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.