Difficulty: Moderately Challenging
Step1
Read the Supreme Court's most famous obscenity decision. In Miller vs. California, the court established three guidelines to determine whether something can be legally defined as obscene. The wording of the decision can be tricky to understand, so you'll need to evaluate material by Miller's "three-pronged test."
Step2
Evaluate questionable material to determine whether or not "the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest." The legally tricky element of this test is the idea of "community." What's considered sexually explicit to the community in San Francisco might be very different from the community in Topeka.
Step3
Decide whether the material in question "depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law." Laws on sexual activity such as sodomy can vary from state to state, so make sure to read about the standards in your state in relation to what would be "patently offensive."
Step4
Determine whether the work in question, when "taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value." The phrase "taken as a whole" is crucial to understanding the third prong in the Miller test, as it determines that sexually explicit images must be evaluated within their original dramatic or artistic context. For instance, the infamous sex scene in "Last Tango in Paris" must be evaluated as one part of a larger dramatic story and not an individual sex scene.
Step5
Decide whether the work in question meets all three of the aspects in the Miller test. Unless all three definitions can be applied to a work, it can't be legally declared obscene. Unlike the other two prongs in the Miller test, the third isn't defined by individual community standards, but by national standards.