Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-14471House OversightOther

Obscenity Conviction of Harry Reems Cited as Potential Precedent for Political Conspiracy Prosecutions

The passage discusses legal commentary on the Harry Reems obscenity case and its possible use against political activists, but provides no concrete new evidence, names of officials, financial transact Legal scholars warned the Reems conviction could set a precedent for conspiracy charges against anti Nat Hentoff and Alan Dershowitz publicly criticized the potential expansion of obscenity law. The

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #017196
Pages
1
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage discusses legal commentary on the Harry Reems obscenity case and its possible use against political activists, but provides no concrete new evidence, names of officials, financial transact Legal scholars warned the Reems conviction could set a precedent for conspiracy charges against anti Nat Hentoff and Alan Dershowitz publicly criticized the potential expansion of obscenity law. The

Tags

first-amendmentobscenity-lawhistorical-casepolitical-influencelegal-exposurelegal-precedenthouse-oversightpolitical-activism

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
4.2.12 WC: 191694 newspaper, book, painting or magazine can be hauled into a Federal court anywhere in the United States and charged with participating in a national conspiracy.” Shortly thereafter, Nat Hentoff wrote a long front-page analysis of the Village Voice. Hentoff warned his readers of the consequences of a government victory in the Reems case. Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard Law School professor and one of the nation’s preeminent constitutional lawyers, has never been known as an apocalyptic civil libertarian. Accordingly, when Professor Dershowitz speaks of the recent criminal convictions in a porno-film case as being so chilling as to ultimately also freeze the printed word, the warning is a weightier than if it had come from those who habitually clamor that the constitutional sky is falling... Should the verdict against Harry Reems be sustained, obscenity indictments throughout the country will pyramid. Hentoff explained that the implications of the Reems prosecution go well beyond obscenity. Ifa conspiracy charge like this one was to be upheld on appeal, the government could make dangerous use of that precedent in political cases involving, for example, antiwar activists. Hentoff then quoted my legal argument: “[H]ere was an actor who, on the one day he worked on Deep Throat, had no idea what the ultimate film was going to look like. He knew it was a sex film, but he had not seen any script in advance. There was no way he could know whether it was going to be soft core or hard core. And, in fact, Harry never even saw the film before it was released. Yet he’s convicted of a conspiracy to move the film, in the form it finally took, across state lines.” Following the publication of the Hentoff article had, hundreds of readers came forward and volunteered their assistance. It also generated numerous other stories—presenting our side of the case. KING OF THE PORNO ACTORS FINDS HIMSELF IN DEEP THROES IN TROUBLE UP TO HIS THROAT HOW HARRY GOT REAMED DEEP THREAT PORN’S DEEP GOAT REEMS SHAFTED IN BIBLE BELT Reems and I crisscrossed the country, speaking at universities, town halls and other venues. Our appearances were widely covered by the media. The New York Times described a joint appearance at the Harvard Law Forum: Harry stood with a portrait of Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter beaming down on him. Besides him sat Alan Dershowitz, looking like a tweedy Marx Brother with his wild nimbus of ash-blond hair, saying that he felt Harry Reems’ trial was the most significant First Amendment conspiracy case since Dr. Spock. 109

Related Documents (6)

House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Alan Dershowitz defends representing Mike Tyson amid campus backlash

The passage only recounts public criticism and debate over Dershowitz's representation of Mike Tyson, without revealing new facts, financial transactions, or links to powerful officials. It offers lit Dershowitz faced letters and attacks for defending Tyson on appeal. Students threatened sexual harassment complaints over his classroom discussions. The controversy centers on the ethical debate of r

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Draft transcript excerpt mentions Jeffrey Epstein invoking the Fifth and a reference to Alan Dershowitz

The passage provides a vague, uncited reference to Epstein and Dershowitz refusing to answer questions in a hearing. It lacks concrete details—no dates, transactions, or specific allegations—making it Jeffrey Epstein allegedly took the Fifth Amendment during a court hearing. A question about Alan Dershowitz was raised, and he also invoked the Fifth. The excerpt is labeled as a rough draft and appe

1p
House OversightUnknown

Discovery Dispute Over Alan Dershowitz's Document Control in Defamation Suit

Discovery Dispute Over Alan Dershowitz's Document Control in Defamation Suit The passage outlines a procedural battle over production of documents and metadata in a defamation case involving Alan Dershowitz. While it flags potential evidence that could expose communications or internal materials, it lacks concrete details about the content, dates, or parties beyond the litigants, limiting immediate investigative value. However, the mention of “control” and alleged refusal to produce metadata could merit follow‑up to determine what information is being withheld and whether it relates to broader controversies surrounding Dershowitz. Key insights: Plaintiffs allege Dershowitz is withholding documents and metadata under the claim of ‘control’.; The objection is framed as ‘word play’ and gamesmanship, suggesting possible intentional concealment.; Discovery objections focus on timeframe limits, implying plaintiffs seek records spanning an undefined period.

1p
House OversightUnknown

Dershowitz seeks to seal Giuffre affidavit in Edwards‑Cassell defamation case, claims media attacks are fabricated

Dershowitz seeks to seal Giuffre affidavit in Edwards‑Cassell defamation case, claims media attacks are fabricated The passage hints at a possible concealment of evidence in a high‑profile defamation dispute involving Alan Dershowitz, a prominent attorney, and references the infamous Giuffre allegations. While it names well‑known legal figures, it provides no concrete financial transactions, dates, or new factual revelations beyond already public claims, limiting its investigative utility. However, the suggestion that a court record may be sealed to hide potentially damaging testimony offers a moderate lead for further document‑review and freedom‑of‑information requests. Key insights: Dershowitz requests the court to declare portions of Ms. Giuffre’s affidavit confidential.; He publicly denies the allegations on BBC Radio 4, framing them as a coordinated false‑story campaign.; Dershowitz threatens perjury prosecution against accusers and seeks disbarment of opposing counsel.

1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: Lesley Groff

1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: Lesley Groff <MIEll

1p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.