Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Christian v. United States, 1977 — 432 U.S. 910 · caselaw · US
General
Christian v. United States
432 U.S. 910·Supreme Court of the United States·1977
with whom Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Marshall join,
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 76-1322.
Christian v. United States.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
[DISSENT — Mr. Justice Brennan,]
Mr. Justice Brennan,
with whom Mr. Justice Stewart and Mr. Justice Marshall join,
dissenting.
Petitioner was convicted in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma of transporting an obscene film in interstate commerce in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 1462. The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the conviction. I would reverse'. I adhere to my view that this statute is “clearly overbroad and unconstitutional on its face.” United States v. Orito, 413 U. S. 139, 147, 148 (1973) (dissenting opinion). In that circumstance, I have no occasion to consider whether the other question presented merits plenary review. See Heller v. New York, 413 U. S. 483, 494 (1973) (dissenting opinion).