In the case of Virginia v. American Booksellers Association, Inc., et al., 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to consider a challenge by booksellers and publishers against a Virginia law that made it illegal to knowingly display for commercial purpose any material deemed harmful to juveniles in places where they may examine or peruse them. The plaintiffs argued that this law violated their First Amendment rights as it imposed content-based restrictions on free speech and was overly broad in its scope. They also claimed that the statute's vagueness led to self-censorship out of fear of prosecution. While the District Court initially dismissed these claims, upon appeal, the Fourth Circuit reversed this decision stating there were legitimate grounds for concern over First Amendment infringement due to potential chilling effects on protected speech caused by uncertainty surrounding what constitutes "harmful" materials under state law.

In the dissenting opinion for Virginia v. American Booksellers Association, Inc., it was argued that the court should not have decided on the constitutionality of a state law without first allowing state courts to interpret it. The dissenters believed that this approach would avoid unnecessary constitutional decisions and respect federalism principles by giving states an opportunity to define their own laws within constitutional limits. They also expressed concern about chilling effects on free speech rights due to overbroad interpretations of obscenity laws, arguing that such concerns could be mitigated if state courts were allowed to narrow down these definitions before federal intervention. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority's view that booksellers faced a credible threat of prosecution under the law in question, suggesting instead that there was no real controversy warranting pre-enforcement review at this stage.