Does section 311.2 of the California Penal Code restrict access to information that is deemed "obscenity"?

Moreover, the 'inherent dangers of undertaking to regulate any form of expression' (Miller v. California, supra, 413 U.S., at p. 23, 93 S.Ct., at p. 2614) cautions against the casual suppression of any material, [16 Cal.3d 96] regardless of its deemed social value. Government censorship, though aimed at the elimination of 'obscenity,' inevitably threatens to curtail a measure of political expression as well. ¹⁶ This danger be

Page 334

In the absence of a powerful governmental purpose, therefore, the First Amendment, in my view, prohibits the state from barring from those who consent to receive it any designated category of communication. To intrude upon the individual's fundamental right to obtain information the statute must be premised on more than a mere rational relation to a permissible state purpose; the proffered regulation must be necessary to the effectuation of a compelling state interest. (City of Carmel-by-the-Sea v. Young (1970) 2 Cal.3d 259, 268, 85 Cal.Rptr. 1, 466 P.2d 255.) Only if it meets this test may Penal Code section 311.2 be sustained.