A Single Line In a 1964 Supreme Court Case Opened The Door To Rogue Leftist Judges

The 1964 Supreme Court case Jacobellis v. Ohio, which involved censorship and obscenity charges against a movie theater manager, Nico Jacobellis. The case is significant due to a controversial remark made by Justice Potter Stewart that raised questions about how concepts like "pornography" can be defined and judged.

1. Background of the Case: The case began when a movie theater in Ohio showed the film "The Lovers," leading to obscenity charges. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Jacobellis.

2. Justice Potter Stewart's Comment: Stewart famously stated, “I know it when I see it,” regarding his judgment of pornography, which he later regretted. This comment has been interpreted as allowing judges to use subjective criteria in their decisions.

3. Philosophical Argument: The article formulates a logical argument based on Stewart's remark:

• It suggests that one can determine if something fits a concept (like pornography) without needing a precise definition.

• The article critiques this by noting that knowing something when you see it lacks a solid foundation in logical reasoning.

4. Logical Flaws: The arguments present a fallacy. Stewart's claim that one can know something without defining it can lead to arbitrary judgments, undermining the legal system. The author argues that judges need more objective standards to make decisions.

5. Implications for the Legal System: The article suggests that Stewart's subjective criteria invite misuse of individual judgment in legal matters, including recent political charges against figures such as President Trump, suggesting a pattern of biased interpretations.

6. The Problem of the Criterion: The conclusion highlights a philosophical dilemma known as The Problem of the Criterion, which poses challenges in defining and applying concepts across various fields, including law, science, and morality.

The commentary argues that Stewart's insights opened a pathway for subjective judgments in law, raising critical issues about how legal and moral standards are defined. It calls for a deeper understanding and clearer definitions to prevent biases and ensure fairness within the judicial system. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/12/a_single_line_in_a_1964_supreme_court_case_opened_the_door_to_rogue_leftist_judges.html