Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the New York State Crime Victims Board, et al. (502 U.S. 105)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided December 10, 1991 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 502 U.S. 105 · 112 S. Ct. 501
- Decided
- December 10, 1991
- Term
- October Term 1991
- Vote
- 8–0
- Majority author
- Justice O'Connor
- Issue area
- First Amendment
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
- Constitutional ruling
- State/territorial law held unconstitutional
Opinion excerpt
Justice O’Connor delivered the opinion of the Court. New York’s “Son of Sam” law requires that an accused or convicted criminal’s income from works describing his crime be deposited in an escrow account. These funds are then made available to the victims of the crime and the criminal’s other creditors. We consider whether this statute is consistent with the First Amendment. I A In the summer of 1977, New York was terrorized by a serial killer popularly known as the Son of Sam. The hunt for the Son of Sam received considerable publicity, and by the time David Berkowitz was identified as the killer and apprehended, the rights to his story were worth a substantial amount. Berkowitz’s chance to profit from his notoriety while his victims and their families remained uncompensated did not escape the notice of New York’s Legislature. The State quickly enacted the statute at issue, N. Y. Exec. Law § 632-a (McKinney 1982 and Supp. 1991). The statute was intended to “ensure that monies received by the criminal under such circumstances shall first be made available to recompense the victims of that crime for their loss and suffering.” Assembly Bill Memorandum Re: A 9019, July 22,1977, reprinted in Legislative Bill Jacket, 1977 N. Y. Laws, ch. 823. As the author of the statute explained: “It is abhorrent to one’s sense of justice and decency that an individual... can expect to receive…
Excerpt of a 30,681-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.