Final answer:
The Supreme Court upholds bans on obscenity except for work with serious value in literature, art, politics, or science. Obscenity is based on local standards and appeals to sexual interests without value. Child prnography is almost uniformly banned.
Step-by-step explanation:
In general, the Supreme Court has upheld bans on obscenity, except for cases involving material that has serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. The Court has ruled, based on the famous Miller test established in 1973, that something can be considered obscene if (a) the average person, applying contemporary community standards, finds that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law, and (c) the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
However, there has been acknowledgment that what may be deemed obscene can vary depending on local standards. The one form of obscenity that the Supreme Court has consistently banned is child prngraphy, with very few exceptions. The Court has also allowed censorship of less-than-obscene content in certain mediums like television and radio, especially when it is likely accessible to minors.