Change brewing in commercial speech; decision signals shift toward greater First Amendment protection

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court ruled on the commercial speech doctrine in 44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island on May 13, 1996. The case concerned a Rhode Island law stating that signs inside stores were the only legal way of advertising liquor prices. The state defended the law as a way of increasing temperance, but the US Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit felt that the 1st Amendment had been violated. The Supreme Court agreed, but there were four opinions based on different grounds and none had majority support. A definitive ruling on the commercial speech doctrine will have to come another day.

Beer, Wine, and Liquor Stores, Liquor stores, Advertising, Alcoholic beverage industry

---

Commercial break; Supreme Court bolsters constitutional protections for commercial speech

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court ruled in Cincinnati v Discovery Network, Inc that Cincinnati's sidewalk newsrack ban for commercial publications was a violation of the commercial speech doctrine. The Court used the four-part test devised in the Central Hudson case for balancing governmental interests and the right of a business to free speech. The third part of that test mandates a 'reasonable fit' between municipal interest in safety and esthetics and a ban of newsracks. The newsrack regulation was struck down according to the reasonable fit test.

---

Business talk: the Supreme Court continues to struggle with commercial speech doctrine

Article Abstract:

In its most recent term the US Supreme Court supported free commercial speech in Rubin v. Coors Brewing but upheld a restriction on such speech in Florida Bar v. Went For It. In a footnote to the opinion he wrote for the majority in Rubin, Justice Clarence Thomas rejected the claim that the govt has more latitude to regulate speech promoting socially harmful activities than it does in other cases. The different outcomes may hinge on the Court's traditional discomfort with lawyer discipline and solicitation cases.

Adolph Coors Co., ACCOB

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: High court ducks its own habeas question. Court: commercial speech deserves protection. Barr 'slam-dunked' by high court on prisons
• Abstracts: Has the practice the common identity to create a program of development? A report suggests reforms to improve both competence and professional values
• Abstracts: Market power in vertical cases. Communication and cooperation among competitors: introduction and overview. The boundaries of horizontal restraints: facilitating practices and invitations to collude
• Abstracts: Justices still seem split on punies. Tort reform tries one more time: Supreme Court will hear a photographer's case that may end verdict reductions
• Abstracts: Failed mergers lead to suits; former partners at Arter & Hadden claim firm didn't keep its promises. Goodwill and free will; New York's highest court holds that goodwill can be a partnership asset - if the contract permits it

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.