It Depends on What the Meaning of 'False' is

It Depends on What the Meaning of 'False' is PDF

Author: Rebecca Tushnet

Publisher:

Published: 2015

Total Pages: 33

ISBN-13:

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

While scholarship regarding the Supreme Court's noncommercial speech doctrine has often focused on the level of protection for truthful, nonmisleading commercial speech, scholars have paid little attention to the exclusion of false or misleading commercial speech from all First Amendment protection. Examining the underpinnings of the false and misleading speech exclusion illuminates the practical difficulties that abolishing the commercial speech doctrine would pose. Through a series of fact patterns in trademark and false advertising cases, this piece demonstrates that defining what is false or misleading is often debatable. If commercial speech were given First Amendment protection, consumer protection and First Amendment protection would be at odds. Rebutting the idea that constitutionally protected commercial speech could effectively address consumer abuses through fraud statues and would not be offensive to the First Amendment, the piece explains that subjecting commercial speech to First Amendment scrutiny would almost completely contract the scope of false advertising law and erode consumer protection. The piece concludes that while excluding commercial speech from constitutional protection has real costs, we are better off in a system that regulates false and misleading commercial speech without heightened First Amendment scrutiny.

Commercial Speech and the First Amendment

Commercial Speech and the First Amendment PDF

Author: Landmark Publications

Publisher:

Published: 2019-06-16

Total Pages: 544

ISBN-13: 9781073557240

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

THIS CASEBOOK contains a selection of U. S. Court of Appeals decisions that analyze, interpret and discuss First Amendment commercial speech doctrine. * * * "The States and the Federal Government are free to prevent the dissemination of commercial speech that is false, deceptive, or misleading, or that proposes an illegal transaction. Commercial speech that is not false or deceptive and does not concern unlawful activities, however, may be restricted only in the service of a substantial governmental interest, and only through means that directly advance that interest." Id. at 638, 105 S.Ct. 2265 (citing Central Hudson, 447 U.S. at 566, 100 S.Ct. 2343) (other internal citations omitted).The regulation of commercial speech is subject to different levels of review, depending on the nature of the law. In Central Hudson, the Court established that a restriction on commercial speech is subject to intermediate scrutiny, that is, a determination of whether the restriction directly advances a substantial governmental interest and is not overly restrictive. 447 U.S. at 564, 100 S.Ct. 2343. In Zauderer, however, the Court created an exception that an informational disclosure law- as opposed to a prohibition on speech- was subject to rational review, that is, a determination of whether the required disclosure is reasonably related to the state's interest. 471 U.S. at 651, 105 S.Ct. 2265. Safelite Group, Inc. v. Jepsen, 764 F. 3d 258 (2nd Cir. 2014).