In the 1967 case of Teitel Film Corp. v. Cusack, the Supreme Court dealt with a First Amendment issue related to film censorship in Chicago. The city had established a Motion Picture Appeal Board that could ban films it deemed "immoral" or "harmful". Teitel Film Corp., along with other plaintiffs, challenged this practice after their film was banned by the board without clear criteria for what constituted an 'objectionable' movie and no opportunity for them to defend their work before the decision was made. They argued that such arbitrary censorship violated their freedom of speech rights under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed with Teitel Film Corp., ruling that while cities have some authority to regulate movies shown within their jurisdiction, they cannot do so arbitrarily or without due process protections for filmmakers. The court held that any system allowing government officials to censor films must include specific standards guiding those decisions and provide filmmakers an opportunity to be heard before any bans are imposed.

In the dissenting opinion for Teitel Film Corp. v. Cusack, Justice William O. Douglas argued that the Chicago Motion Picture Appeal Board's decision to ban a film due to its content was an unconstitutional violation of free speech rights under the First Amendment. He contended that censorship should only be applied in extreme cases where there is clear and present danger or obscenity involved, neither of which were applicable in this case according to him. Furthermore, he criticized the majority's reliance on local community standards as a basis for determining obscenity since it could lead to arbitrary and inconsistent decisions across different jurisdictions within the country.