Question

In January 2012 a new exhibit came to the St. Louis Art Museum. The exhibit contained, among other things, photos of nude men and women depicted in a variety of poses, photos of adults engaged in various sexual activities, and pictures of several nude men standing very close to one another. Finally, there were several pictures that resembled recent advertisements by a famous clothing designer. This last set of photos portrayed scantily dressed teenagers who were also posed in allegedly "erotic" poses.
The City Commission on Decency reviewed the exhibit as it was being constructed in the museum. This commission was set up in the early 1980s as a response to the growing use of "sex in art." It is the duty of the commission to review any potentially obscene or indecent art exhibits that may be shown before the exhibits can be open to the public. While the commission has the power only to review exhibits and make recommendations to the mayor about what it believes to be obscene or indecent material, the mayor has always followed its rulings. The decisions of the commission are based on the Public Standards of Decency found in St. Louis Statute 4.5.7.
After a public hearing where the new exhibit was described in detail to a group of interested citizens, the Commission on Decency made two recommendations. First, the photographs of the adult males and the teenage children should not be a part of the exhibit. In short, they should be taken down before the exhibit could open to the public. Second, the commission recommended that the exhibit be open only to citizens over the age of eighteen; even with the consent of an adult, any person under eighteen should not be allowed to enter the special exhibit area. A seventeen-year-old senior at a local high school sued along with the artist who created the exhibit. Both claimed their First Amendment rights had been violated.
The case comes to the Supreme Court with a variety of issues, but with one main question: Does St. Louis Statute 4.5.7 violate the First Amendment rights of the artist as well as of the children who want to see the exhibit? Why or why not?

Answer


A. Varies