In the 1973 case Speight, T/A Harem Book Store, et al. v. Slaton et al., the U.S Supreme Court was asked to consider whether Georgia's obscenity laws violated First Amendment rights of free speech and expression. The appellants were adult bookstore owners who had been convicted under state law for selling obscene materials and sought to have their convictions overturned on constitutional grounds. They argued that Georgia's obscenity statute was overly broad and vague, thereby infringing upon their First Amendment rights by chilling protected speech. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Georgia’s obscenity laws in a per curiam decision (a ruling issued collectively by multiple judges), affirming that states have a legitimate interest in regulating commerce involving obscene material due to its potential harm to individuals and society at large. The court found no merit in appellants' claims about vagueness or overbreadth as they did not demonstrate any substantial infringement on constitutionally protected activities.

In the dissenting opinion for Speight v. Slaton, Justice Douglas argued that Georgia's obscenity law was unconstitutional because it violated First Amendment rights to free speech and press. He contended that the state had no right to suppress books or films on grounds of offensiveness as this would lead to a form of censorship where only "approved" ideas could be disseminated. Furthermore, he criticized the majority's reliance on community standards in determining what constitutes obscenity, stating that such an approach is subjective and can easily lead to suppression of unpopular views. He also expressed concern about giving juries too much discretion in deciding what materials are obscene since they may not have sufficient understanding of constitutional principles related to freedom of expression.