When a certain group seems to be targeted from every federal heavyweight, it’s always comforting to know there are legal experts they can count on, and one is Paul Cambria. Apart from being one of the adult industry’s most formidable constitutional attorneys, with other mainstream figures like Marilyn Manson and DMX in his roster, it’s safe to say Cambria is a force to be reckoned with—especially if his ire is struck.

The client that stands out most, and made Cambria a public figure of sorts, is Larry Flynt, owner of Hustler magazine. He was an eyewitness to the publisher’s shooting and continues to be his general counsel, along with eight other attorneys “who do nothing but his work all day long.” In light of the current obscenity trials that seem to be enjoying a revival of sorts, we sat down with Cambria and picked his brain on thoughts of the current trials, as well as his valued opinion on what the outcome will bring. Most importantly, Cambria advises us we should exercise our rights as citizens (voting is one way) to keep anti-adult legislation at bay. If you’d like to continue to have Jenna Jameson as part of your nightly routine, I say that’s sound advice.

SexHerald: You’ve been in the adult industry, per se, or should I say you’ve been a protector of free speech and constitutional rights in the industry for decades.

Paul Cambria: It’s not quite that long, but it’s over 20 years. When I was a very, very young attorney right out of the box I was working with Harold Fahringer, who was a senior partner at that time—since retired from our firm. As a result of that was involved with a lot of landmark cases. As the years went by, then I started—as I got older and more experienced and so on—representing a number of the major companies in the business, along with obviously small start-up companies. Today, probably represent the major companies both from the production of movie standpoint and from rubber good standpoint, adult novelty standpoint as well.

SH: You were with obviously one of the most famous, or infamous, moments in the history of…

Cambria: With regard to [Larry] Flynt? The Flynt story is kind of an interesting story. Fahringer and I had tried the Al Goldstein case in Wichita, Kansas then in Kansas City, Kansas. The jury hung 9-3 for acquittal, which was a major, major victory then. We received a call one day from a fellow identified as Larry Flynt, and he said, ‘I’d like to interview Mr. Fahringer for our new publication that we have called Hustler.’ And I said, ‘Gee, I’ve never heard of that publication.’ And he said, ‘Well, we’ve got a couple of issues out. I want to interview Fahringer.’ I said, ‘Well, that’s fine. I’ll set it up for you.’ During the course of that conversation, Flynt and I started talking generally. He said, ‘What kind of work do you fellas do?’ I said, ‘Well, we primarily do criminal defense work.’ And at that time, sort of adult work as well. And he said, ‘Well, I have a case down here in Cincinnati. I’m indicted for allegedly bribing the police chief and some other things. Do you guys do that kind of work?’ I said, ‘Yes, we do.’ Then we made an arrangement at that time. He said, ‘Well, how much would you charge for a retainer?’ I told him, ‘Five thousand dollars.’ He said, ‘Wow, I don’t exactly have that much in cash, but can we work out some kind of payment plan?’ I said, ‘Sure, we’ll work out a payment plan.’ You know, I was just kind of captivated by the guy, he was an interesting guy on the phone. So when Fahringer came back to town, I told him two things: I set up an interview for you with this new magazine called Hustler, and the other thing is that we’ve been retained to go to Cincinnati, Ohio to represent this new guy who’s interviewing you basically on credit. [laughs] He looked at me like I had two heads.

Anyway, we went and we were defending Larry on those charges. While they were pending, he was indicted for obscenity for Hustler. And they had passed a law in Ohio which they called an Organized Crime Act. And it basically said if five or more people commit any crime for gain, it’s organized crime, you get 7-25 years. So, they indicted him for that. We tried the case. At that time, Jimmy, his brother, was co-publisher. I represented Jimmy; Harold represented Larry. Jimmy was acquitted; Larry was convicted. And, Larry’s company was convicted. So, Harold and I then represented Larry and his company on appeal and we won the appeal; they just declared the standard unconstitutional. In the meantime, though, before the appeal, of course Larry was sentenced to 25 years in prison. And we won that, then became pretty much a national figure because no one could believe that anybody could get 25 years for publishing a magazine. So we became quite a celebrity, if you will, as a result of that.

A number of companies were handling his magazine. One of them was the Elson company, out of Atlanta. What had happened was they [ Atlanta] kept telling Elson they were going to indict him if he kept selling Hustler. So, he stopped. And Larry said, ‘Well, I’ll go down and sell it myself.’ So, he went down and rented the little newsstand and went in there and sold Hustler. And while he was selling it, this prosecutor was running for re-election in the county and came over and served Larry with a criminal charge of obscenity for Lawrenceville, Georgia—his area. And we wound up trying the case in Lawrenceville—that’s the case he was shot in. We were in the middle of the trial. My partner was inside, I was outside in the phone booth. And Larry was walking across the square and they shot him, basically in front of me. From then on, Larry really became a major international figure. Not only could he get 25 years, now he could get shot over it. It turned out he got shot because he had published this black-and-white centerfold, and some white supremacist guy tracked him down and shot him.

That’s the Larry Flynt aspect of it. But, I represent everybody and anybody. I do work for Playboy, I’ve done work for Penthouse, I represent Vivid, I represent Wicked, Doc Johnson, Cal Exotics, Naughty America. The list goes on and on.

SH: Clearly, you’re an icon in the adult industry.

Cambria: What I am: an icon or a carbuncle. I’m not sure which one it is but I’ve represented them all, we’ve got a great relationship, and I figure I’ve got about 25 more years to go.SH: Do you see this administration’s proclaimed war on obscenity drawing to a close as a failure or do you see it escalating?

Cambria: I think it’s kind of in the middle at this point. They clearly haven’t just drawn to a close. I know enough about the investigations that are out there at the moment to know that they’re still actively pursuing charges and their targets are not just limited to people who might be on the fringe or have material on the fringe. So, I would say they’re in midstream at the moment.

SH: How do you see your allies reacting to this? I understand the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) is becoming increasingly concerned with individual and constitutional rights.

Cambria: Well, I would hope they are. I think a lot of lawyers are in denial in thinking it’s never going to come. And I’ve seen it come in so many different generations in waves but I’m not denying it at all. I think it is going to come. How large? When will it be? That’s one thing. How successful it’ll be? I don’t think it’s going to be successful. I don’t think that the tenor of America is what it was even 10 years ago, as far as acceptance of adult entertainment as, in fact, an acceptable form of entertainment.

SH: When you say “it’s going to come,” what exactly do you mean by that?

Cambria: I think there are going to be attempts by federal prosecutors to successfully prosecute so-called mainstream adult material. I see it now. I’m currently involved in one. It’s there.

SH: Are you shocked by the behavior of the government and the administration? Is it unexpected?

Cambria: Not shocked or unexpected but startled it’s happening. I’m not at all. This has happened time after time after time. There’s just been a long hiatus, and I think the hiatus [comes from] the feeling of the Clinton administration about priorities and what’s really important in the world as far as prosecution [goes]. And, 9/11 obviously has distracted the government and required the government to channel its resources in the triage of importance. But, election time is coming up. The obscenity issue has always been a way to easily get votes, because adult material being prosecuted gets reported, the media picks it up, it’s juicy, it’s sexy—not to create a pun there. That means, politicians, sheriffs, legislators, prosecutors, whatever, go after it; they’re probably going to get some ink. That’s what they’re looking for, and we always see it that way. Always.

SH: For something entirely different… I understand that you have not one, not two, but five kids?

Cambria: Yeah, five daughters. Actually, I have four daughters and my niece who is with us who we’re raising. So, I have five children. And that’s actually one of the things I’ve said at the Senate. I said I have five children and I’m very familiar with content restriction and so on, and it’s easy to do by any parent who’s paying attention and doing their job.

SH: So, what would you suggest to parents who are trying to keep their children from viewing mature adult material?

Cambria: They have to do exactly what we do for things that are meant for adults. If I had a gun, I would put it in a place where my child wouldn’t have access to it, and it wouldn’t deny me access to it if I wanted to have it. The same thing with liquor, the same thing with prescription drugs, and it should be the same thing with computers and adult entertainment. You do what responsible parents do. You locate the computer in a central location, you monitor what’s on their screens, you look at what they access… AOL™ has the simplest thing in the world with Guardian. Every time my kids get up on the Internet, BOOM! Guardian sends me a report since I’m the home screen. And, they tell me what they’ve accessed; it’s simple.

What we should be doing, and what the government should be doing, is have public service announcements, like we do for smoking. Smoking can be hazardous to your health. Okay, fine. That works for smoking. What we should say with regard to adult entertainment is: Be responsible. Control the entertainment that comes into your home. Control it on your satellite and cable box, which is easy enough to do with remote controls. Do the same thing on your computer; that’s all you need to do. You know, it’s the old story: You don’t burn down the house to light the candle, because you want to protect children by putting rubber bumpers around the whole world and saying, ‘The world can only be fit for children.’ That’s how we protect them, in depriving adults of what they’re entitled to.

SH: Speaking to the readers, how would you advise them in terms of what steps they should take to protect their constitutional rights in regards to the privacy of their bedroom? How should they be proactive?

Cambria: You know the thing that you always hear that supposedly we have that’s powerful is the right to vote, and of course we do. And it seems to me that politicians who have this kind of agenda, we need to vote against them. It turns out, however, that the same old group usually figures out a way to get re-elected. So that may be a weak tool, but it’s one that we have to use where we can use it. The other way is, if you’re lucky enough to be called upon for jury service, you have to indicate that you can be fair and impartial, and then be fair and impartial. What happens a number of times is jurors who think adult material is acceptable are very vocal about that and they get knocked off juries. The ones who think it’s terrible are not vocal about it at all, they’re not honest about it at all, and they sneak their way on the juries, and then they do their talking in the jury room. The other is, of course, if indeed issues come up… I’ll give you an example. I’m representing Jenna Jameson in her fight on her dance club in Phoenix. Well, there’s going to be a number of citizens there who can write letters to the editors; they can vote “no” because we’re having a referendum as to whether or not the legislation they’re proposing should be overwritten by the voters. Those are ways they can do it.

We’re going to see more and more referendums challenging legislation. We have one in Los Angeles, there’s one brewing in Seattle, and now there’s going to be one in September in Phoenix, Arizona. Support the efforts to overturn legislation that’s bad through voting. Other than that, patronize your local adult outlet; keep the dollars flowing so they can underwrite the fights.