TheReismanInstitute-banner Please visit The Reisman Institute website for current information.

JAR-video-banner-small JAR-5-book-banner-small Stop-Kinsey-banner-small

About Dr. Reisman | Posted: June 12, 2011


Worldwide Courts and Legislatures Presence

Past Consultant: California Judicial Investigative Task Force, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) on Sex Science Fraud (see also: THE ALEC REPORT)

US Senate, Washington DC: US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, The Science Behind Pornography Addiction - November 18, 2004

Description: Dr. Reisman provided expert testimony examining brain science related to pornography addiction and the effects of such addiction on families and communities.


THE NETHERLANDS, October 1994: Amsterdam District Court Judge, mr U.W. Bentinck, ruled against Playboy's demands for retractions and reparations following Dr. Reisman's appearance in a Dutch public tv broadcast, in which results from Reisman's DoJ study Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler were discussed. Read more here...

SOUTH AFRICA, October 2003: The South African Constitutional Court relied upon Dr. Reisman's research on the impact of pornography on brain, mind, memory in its decision to halt legal leeway for the distribution of child pornography in South Africa.

SOUTH AFRICA, 1995: The Office of the Attorney General thanks Dr. Reisman for "your knowledge and your expertise.... your assistance in saving this nation from a potential disaster.... we have achieved a major victory on the pornography front.... which would not have been possible without the aid of your expert knowledge, books, videos and articles."Dr. Reisman's testimony on the ways graphic, antisocial imagery reconfigures brain, mind and memory helped pass The Film and Publications Bill of 1995, by an overwhelming majority of 300 votes, prohibiting child pornography in any form (written, visual, cartoon, "artistic" or pseudo), and prohibiting current types of "adult" pornography.

AUSTRALIA, Parliament 1994 and 1992: Following her April 6, 1992 invited testimony and report on pornography and the harm factor to the Senate Select Committee on Community Standards, Parliament banned "X" Rated materials from pay cable TV, while her March 1994 research paper aided Parliament's decision, based on harm, to similarly ban "R" Rated materials from pay cable TV.

CANADA, Supreme Court 1992: Dr. Reisman provided briefing materials on pornography and harm, aiding the Canadian Supreme Court's unanimous decision February 27, 1992 to ban all pornography as "obscene" as it undermines equality by degrading, subjugating and dehumanizing women. Subsequently, in 1993, Dr. Reisman was tasked by the Ontario Human Rights Commission to produce a research paper, "Pornography in Neighborhood Convenience Stores: Neurochemical Effects on Women," for a pornography case challenging the new law--results pending

NEW ZEALAND, Tribunal 1991 and 1989: Dr. Reisman's research was delivered by-proxy via Dr. John Court to the New Zealand Pornography Commission investigations in 1989.She was again asked for, and delivered, written testimony to the New Zealand Indecency Tribunal in 1991

ISRAEL, Knesset 1982: Dr. Reisman founded a media monitoring, non-profit foundation in Israel, funded by private and public sources that have presented findings on Israeli media to the Knesset and throughout Israel. At minimum, major corrections and improvements were made in controlling advertisements, largely due to Dr. Reisman's data collection, cadre training, and public dissemination of information.


MASSACHUSETTS, 1989: Oakes v. Massachusetts. Massachusetts Attorney General, James Shannon cited Dr. Reisman's DoJ, Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention study in this successful brief and in oral appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Shannon wrote (1/8/90):

I contacted Dr. Reisman in connection with an important child pornography case, Massachusetts v. Oakes...that I argued in the United States Supreme Court in January 1989...I had to convince the court that both nude and sexually explicit photographs of children were exploitive and harmful.To make the point, I quoted Dr. Reisman's study, "Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse, and Hustler Magazines," in which she showed that sexually exploitive photographs of children condone and promote a distorted view of sexuality, often by pairing...sexuality and violence, or depicting children as desiring sexual activity with adults.

OHIO, 1989: Osborne v. Ohio. Amici cited "Neurochemical Evidence Shows That People React Differently To Pictures Than They Do To Words Raising New First Amendment Considerations" and thanks "Dr. Judith Reisman for her valuable development of this concept" (:23) and, "J. Reisman's New York Review of Law and Social Change," (1979) where she addressed media, science and civil rights.

On behalf of the Amici in Osborne v. Ohio.... thanks for your invaluable assistance rendered to us in researching and writing this brief.Your ideas on how the visual images effect people substantially more than the written word is indeed a new concept and could have many significant ramifications in the area of the First Amendment.If in fact the court and legislatures do believe that visual images, specifically of sexual, sexually violent and violent material, will have a greater impact on people in general and children in particular, there may be justification for more strict legislation in these areas than would apply to the written material.Moreover, under a First Amendment analysis, since the harm is greater, there would be more of a compelling state interest to have stricter laws. (H. Robert Showers, 10/12/89).


Crawford v. Lungren, 1996: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the right of California's news rack laws to protect minors in support of Amici arguments by the National Law Center for Children and Families.Amici cited to Reisman's Canadian paper,"Pornography in Neighborhood Convenience Stores: Neurochemical Effects on Women," that "Images reach the brain more quickly than print" (:15).

Steffan v. Cheney, 1991, 1993 and Steffan v. Perry (1994): The U.S. States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.The lower court in 1991, under Judge Oliver Gash, cited Reisman's book in rejecting Steffan's military reinstatement. To answer Steffan's appeal, in 1994, Colonel Ronald Ray Esq., Ret., and Reisman filed an Amicus brief on behalf of the Naval Aviation Foundation in support of the Department of Defense ruling, that homosexuality and sexual conduct are inseparable. General P.X. Kelley, former member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Commandant of The Marine Corps, wrote Reisman's "groundbreaking work in Kinsey, Sex & Fraud," (October 5, 1994) was needed in the Steffan case. We won.

United States v. Knox, 1994: US v. Knox. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third District, ruled in support of arguments presented in the Institute for Media Education Amicus and Arnold & Porter written with Colonel Ron Ray and Randall Shaheen, citing Reisman's research on images and for OJJDP, to protect children from use in child pornography.

TEXAS, 1993: Despite obstructions, the Court's successful use of Dr. Reisman's findings continues. A Texas prosecutor wrote the following:

As a prosecuting attorney, I have tried approximately 35 obscenity jury trials in which the defense has called a sociologist as an expert witness on community standards. Your book, Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, has proven invaluable on cross-examination. This sociologist studied at the Kinsey Institute and bases a lot of expert opinions on his studies at that institute. To be able to point out to the jury the fraud that Alfred Kinsey and his institute have perpetrated is a very effective tool... I encourage you to continue your work in this area to point out to the public the frauds sociology and psychology have given us (March 8, 1993).

Ohio v. Contemporary Arts Center, 1991: Mapplethorpe art trial; obscenity. The presiding judge rules in agreement with Dr. Reisman's expert testimony re: what was Mapplethorpe's artistic "whole" to be viewed by the jury. Judge David J. Albanese cites directly from Reisman's definition of what "an image" is and how the image works on viewers.

"The Court finds that each photograph has a separate identity; each photograph has u visual and unique image permanently recorded."

-- The Washington Post, September 7, 1990, p. B5

Frank Prouty, the State prosecutor writes: As you know, the State filed a Motion in Limine regarding what constituted the "whole" as that issue related to the Mapplethorpe exhibit. Your testimony was critical to the Motion, and your testimony ensured a favorable ruling for the State... The issues and interpretation you presented concerning the child photographs and the remaining photographs substantiated the prosecution's view... The perspective you established was both concise and persuasive, and should be considered in any interpretation of pornography and its affect in both children and adults (March 4, 1991).

CALIFORNIA, 1989: Ventura County Superior Court cites Reisman's research to convict child pornography Hustler cartoonist, Dwaine Tinsley. Mr. Hardy indicated that your report [Dr. Reisman's "Images of Children, Crime and Violence"] was extremely helpful throughout the prosecution of the Tinsley case. Mr. Hardy used the report as a reference source for putting together his closing arguments, and for his cross examination... Mr. Hardy considers your report to be a great piece of work, and has recommended the report ... to the National Association of District Attorneys ... your report ... was a great help in the prosecution of this case (March 28, 1989).

Dr. Reisman has been successfully consulted on sexual harassment in the Minnesota workplace; on a mother's rights to child custody from an AIDS father in Kentucky; in testimony before the Attorney General's Commission on pornography; on homosexual versus parents rights in a Connecticut classroom on fraudulent sex education in Falmouth schools. She is currently consultant for a first amendment versus parental rights case involving one government school, in a second school versus parents' case involving subversion of parents to provide contraception to minors and a third case involving sexual harassment in the workplace.


WASHINGTON, D.C., December 1995: HR 2749, The Child Protection and Ethics in Education Act, is introduced.A Bill to determine if Alfred Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and/or Sexual Behavior in the Human Female are the result of any fraud or criminal wrongdoing: 41 co-sponsors; carried over to 1997-1998 legislature to investigate the Kinsey data.This Bill is the culmination of Dr. Reisman's 20-years of research and advocacy for children.A Senate hearing waits in the wings.

MINNESOTA, 1993: After a last-minute briefing and presentation of pedophile exhibits by Dr. Reisman to Minnesota legislators, "affectional orientation" language, which allows children to be in legal sexual relationships with adults, is removed from two pending Minnesota laws.

GEORGIA, 1992: Heeding Dr. Reisman's exhibits and expert testimony on February 13, 1992, the State of Georgia House Education Subcommittee terminates Georgia's then mandated sex education curriculum due to its false, Kinseyan database.The educator who organized the legislative event credits Reisman's data, additionally, with the overwhelming legislative defeat of the homosexual/sex education lobby, by a house vote of 150-1 and a Senate vote of 48-6.The legislature prohibits teaching youths illegal behavior such as sodomy, adultery, and fornication.(C. Weatherly, Education Analysis & Research Systems, June 11, 1992).

WASHINGTON, D.C., 1991: Congressman William E. Danneymeyer cites Dr. Reisman's Kinsey fraud findings in a floor debate, which helped sway cancellation of a proposed $18 million dollar teen-sex survey (TIME, August 5, 1991: 27), viewed by the national sex-education monopoly as a major defeat in their efforts to modify American youth.

VIRGINIA, 1986: Dr. Peter Anderson wrote:"The City Council voted 7-0 in favor of banning topless dancing ... due to Dr. Reisman's knowledge of the material and her ability to present it in such a clear and concise manner.I encourage anyone to have Dr. Reisman address either their citizens or community leaders if they need help in fighting pornography in the local community". (June 1986).

MICHIGAN, circa 1980: Testimony to the Michigan State Senate Juvenile Justice Corrections, to aid decision-making on pornography harms.


ILLINOIS, 1994: As an expert on "Cultural Diversity," Dr. Reisman's presentation of evidence, citing to the use of Kinsey's findings in the planned curriculum, successfully aided parents in eliminating a $600,000 mandated Diversity program in Springfield, Illinois schools.

MISSOURI, 1988: Missouri Department of Corrections. A Corrections psychologist writes that a group formed to study eliminating Playboy, Penthouse, and Hustler, and all other pornography from the prison system. A call to Missouri corrections finds all pornography but Playboy banned. "Two males within the administrative structure, who reportedly saw no problem with pornography within our system, were greatly swayed in favor of its removal once they read your report...[One] often attempted to sway policy toward allowing pornography to pacify inmates. He now is a member of our committee to halt and ban incoming pornography. Yours was the only report he read." (10/26/88)

COVER STORY in The National Review, MAY 19, 1997 "Mortal Sins": "The sexual revolution was based on a lie. Judith Reisman has spent thirty years uncovering the truth," by Tom Bethell [and] featured in the Reader's Digest, (4/97), "Sex, Lies and the Kinsey Report."