◆ SpookStack

die not whether the fruits of the research will be valuable to society.” The Tariff Act of 1930 provides no warrant for either customs officials or this court to sit in review of the decisions of scholars as to the bypathsa of learning upon which they shall tread. The question ia solely whether, as to those persons who wili see the libelled material, there ie a reasonable probability that it will appeal to their 40 all ideas having even the slightest redeeming social A4mportance -- unorthodox ideas, controversial ideas, even ideas hateful to the prevailing climate of opinion -- have the full protection of the [Constitutional ; guaranties, unless excludable because they encroach upon the limited area of more amportant interests. But implicit in the history of the First Amendment is the rejection of obscenity as utterly without Pedeeming social importance. *,.. Sex, a great and mysterious motive force in human iife, Bas indisputably been a subject of absorbing interest to mankind through the ages; it is one of the vital problems of human interest and public concern." Roth v. United States, Pan U.8. 476, 484, (1957) (footnote omitted). I believe t the statement above quoted eoncerning the rejection of sbeoent ty must be interpreted in the light of the widespread ‘@istribution of the material in Roth. While I do not reach the Constitutional issues posed by claimant in this case I may mote that, since it is taker as proved in this ease that the libelled material will not, in all probability, appeal to the prurient interest of those into whose hands it will come, Z eannot comeive of any interest which Congress might have antended to protect by prohibiting the importation of the material by the claimant.