Con law kills me

I just took my con law exam on Saturday and one of the main topics was freedom of speech. The court has held that sexually explicit material is constitutionally protected under the First Amendment. However, obscene material is not covered. I mean, is there really a difference? Aren't they one and the same?

This was probably the class I was most excited to take in law school because I believed that it would involve good discussions of American history. I was wrong. It is also one of the most confusing subjects in law school because, unlike every other field of law, the court's rulings are not based on the principle of stare decisis. The rulings are based on the political makeup of the court. As of right now, that is probably a good thing since the Court at this point in time leans more to the right than it does to the left. That being said, rules that I have just learned which supposedly should be the same as rules handed down two hundred years ago, might magically change tomorrow just because the Court doesn't like them.

Anyway, at least the class is over. Time to study for business organizations, which is infinitely more boring, but at least the rules have been the same for decades and will not change simply because the Court does not agree with them.