In the case of Kois v. Wisconsin, 1971, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a newspaper editor who had been convicted under a state obscenity law for publishing an article containing explicit language and sexual content. The court held that the First Amendment protected his right to publish such material as long as it was not "utterly without redeeming social value." This ruling expanded on previous decisions regarding what constituted obscene material by introducing a new standard: whether or not the work in question contributed to society in some way. In this case, even though many people found the article offensive, it was deemed to have social value because it addressed important issues related to human sexuality and freedom of expression.

In the dissenting opinion for KOIS v. Wisconsin, the justice argued that obscenity should not be protected by the First Amendment because it lacks social value and contributes to moral degradation. The justice believed that obscene material is harmful to society as a whole, particularly children who might come across such content. They also expressed concern about how difficult it would be for law enforcement agencies to distinguish between what is considered obscene and what isn't if all forms of expression were given constitutional protection under free speech rights. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view on community standards being used as a measure of obscenity; instead believing that national standards should apply in order to maintain consistency across states.