In the case of Times Film Corp. v. City of Chicago et al., 1960, the U.S Supreme Court upheld a city ordinance that required films to be reviewed by a censorship board before they could be publicly shown within the city limits. The plaintiff, Times Film Corporation, argued that this was an infringement on their First Amendment rights and constituted prior restraint - government action that prohibits speech or other expression before it can take place. However, in its decision, the court ruled 5-4 in favor of upholding the ordinance as constitutional under local police powers for public welfare and morals regulation purposes. This ruling effectively allowed film censorship boards to continue operating until later cases would challenge such practices again.

The dissenting opinion in the Times Film Corp. v. City of Chicago case argued that the city's ordinance requiring pre-screening and licensing for films was not a violation of First Amendment rights, as it did not aim to suppress ideas or opinions but rather sought to protect public morals, safety, and welfare from obscene content. The justices contended that this type of regulation is within the police power granted to states under the Constitution. They also pointed out that other forms of expression such as books and newspapers are subject to similar regulations without infringing on free speech rights; therefore, they saw no reason why motion pictures should be exempted from these rules. Furthermore, they believed there were adequate safeguards in place against potential abuses by authorities because any denial could be appealed through courts which would ensure due process.