New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · ¶42

“For if the bookseller is criminally liable without knowledge of the contents,... he will tend to restrict the books he sells to those he has inspected; and thus the State will have imposed a restriction upon the distribution of constitutionally protected as well as obscene literature.... And the bookseller’s burden would become the public’s burden, for by restricting him the public’s access to reading matter would be restricted.... [¶] is timidity in the face of his absolute criminal liability, thus would tend to restrict the public’s access to forms of the printed word which the State could not constitutionally suppress directly. The bookseller’s self-censorship, compelled by the State, would be a censorship affecting the whole public, hardly less virulent for being privately administered. Through it, the distribution of all books, both obscene and not obscene, would be impeded.” (361…

U. S. Reports, bound volume
U. S. Reports, volume 376, at 254 (Library of Congress) · transcription: Caselaw Access Project
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.