Williams v. Pryor

http://dbpedia.org/resource/Williams_v._Pryor an entity of type: WikicatSexToys

Williams v. Pryor, 229 F.3d 1331 (11th Cir. 2000), rehearing denied, 240 F.3d 944 (11th Cir. 2001) was a federal lawsuit that unsuccessfully challenged an Alabama law criminalizing the sale of sex toys in the state. In 1998, a statute enacted by the legislature of the State of Alabama amended the obscenity provisions of the Alabama Code to make the distribution of certain defined sexual devices a criminal offense. Vendors and users of such devices filed a constitutional challenge to the statute in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama against William H. Pryor, Jr., in his official capacity as the Attorney General of the State of Alabama. The district court declined to hold the statute violated any constitutional right but determined the statute was unconstit rdf:langString
rdf:langString Williams v. Pryor
xsd:integer 19430754
xsd:integer 1115172746
<second> 25920.0
rdf:langString a unanimous court
<second> 172800.0
<second> 25920.0
rdf:langString US-CourtOfAppeals-11thCircuit-Seal.png
xsd:date 2008-09-23
xsd:gMonthDay --10-12
xsd:integer 2000
rdf:langString Sherri Williams, B.J. Bailey, et al. v. Bill Pryor
rdf:langString R. Lanier Anderson III, Susan Harrell Black, Cynthia Holcomb Hall
rdf:langString Williams v. Pryor
rdf:langString Black
rdf:langString Williams v. Pryor, 229 F.3d 1331 (11th Cir. 2000), rehearing denied, 240 F.3d 944 (11th Cir. 2001) was a federal lawsuit that unsuccessfully challenged an Alabama law criminalizing the sale of sex toys in the state. In 1998, a statute enacted by the legislature of the State of Alabama amended the obscenity provisions of the Alabama Code to make the distribution of certain defined sexual devices a criminal offense. Vendors and users of such devices filed a constitutional challenge to the statute in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama against William H. Pryor, Jr., in his official capacity as the Attorney General of the State of Alabama. The district court declined to hold the statute violated any constitutional right but determined the statute was unconstitutional because it lacked a rational basis. The State appealed to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the lower court ruling on October 12, 2000.
xsd:nonNegativeInteger 10967

data from the linked data cloud