4.4. SR 11-13-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

113 S. Ct. 1505 (Cite as: 507 U.S. 410, '421, 113 S.Ct. 1505, *'1512) Page 8 900, 904, 84 L.Ed. 1213] (1940). "If there is a kind of commercial speech that lacks all First Amendment protection, therefore it must be distinguished by its content. Yet the speech whose content deprives it of protection cann6t simply be speech on a commercial subject. No one would contend that our pharmacist may be prevented from being heard on the subject of whether, in general, pharmaceutical prices should be regulated, or their advertisement forbidden. Nor can it be dispositive that a commercial advertisement is noneditorial, and merely reports a fact. Purely factual matter of public interest may claim protection. Bigelow v. Virginia, 421 U.S. [809], at 822 [95 S. Ct. 2222, 2232, 44 L.Ed. 2d 600 (1975) ]; Thornhill v. Alabama, 310 U.S. 88, 102 [60 S. Ct. 736, 744, 84 L.Ed. 1093] (1940)." Id., 425 U.S., at 761-762, 96 S. Ct., at 1825. We then held that even speech that does no more than propose a commercial transaction is protected by the First Amendment. /d., at 762, 96 S.Ct., at 1825. [FN17] FN17. Justice BLACKMUN, writing for the Court in Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350, 97 S.Ct. 2691, 53 L.Ed.2d 810 (1977), summarized the reasons for extending First Amendment protection to "core" commercial speech: "The listener's interest [in commercial speech] is substantial: the consumer's concern for the free flow of commercial speech often may be far keener than his concern for urgent political dialogue. Moreover, significant societal interests are served by such speech. Advertising, though entirely commercial, may often carry information of import to significant issues of the day. See Bigelow v. Virginia, 421 U.S. 809 [95 S.Ct. 2222, 44 L.Ed.2d 600] (1975). And commercial speech serves to inform the public of the availability, nature, and prices of products and services, and thus performs an indispensable role in the allocation of resources in a free enterprise system. See FTC v. Procter & Gamble Co., 386 U.S. 568, 603-604 [87 S.Ct. 1224, 1243, 18 L.Ed.2d 303] (1967) (Harlan, J., concurring). In short, such speech serves individual and societal interests in assuring informed and reliable decisionmaking." M., 433 U.S., at 364, 97 S.Ct., at 2699. Of course, we were not the first to recognize the value of commercial speech: "'[Advertisements] are well calculated to enlarge and enlighten the public mind, and are worthy of being enumerated among the many methods of awakening and maintaining the popular attention, with which more modern times, beyond all preceding example, abound.'" D. Boorstin, The Americans: The Colonial Experience 328, 415 (1958), quoting I. Thomas, History of Printing in America with a Biography of Printers, and an Account of Newspapers (2d ed. 1810). *'1513 *422 In later opinions we have stated that speech proposing a commercial transaction is entitled to lesser protection than other constitutionally guaranteed expression. See Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn., 436 U.S. 447, 455-456, 98 S. Ct. 1912, 1918, 56 L.Ed. 2d 444 (1978). We have also suggested that such lesser protection was appropriate for a somewhat larger category of commercial speech--"that is, expression related solely to the economic interests of the speaker and its audience." Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Cornm'n of New York, 447 U.S., at 561, 100 S. Ct., at 2348. We did not, however, use that definition in either Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp., 463 U.S. 60, 103 S. Ct. 2875, 77 L. Ed. 2d 469 (1983), or in Board of Trustees of State University of N. Y. v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469, 109 S. Ct. 3028, 106 L.Ed. 2d 388 (1989). In the Bolger case we held that a federal statute prohibiting the mailing of unsolicited advertisements for contraceptives could not be applied to the appellee's promotional materials. Most of the appellee's mailings consisted primarily of price and quantity information, and thus fell "within the core notion of commercial speech--'speech which does "no more than propose a commercial transaction.' .... Bolger, 463 U.S., at 66, 103 S. Ct., at 2880 (quoting Virginia Pharmacy, 425 U.S., at 762, 96 S. Ct., at 1825, in turn quoting Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Comrn'n on Human Relations, 413 U.S. 376, 385, 93 S. Ct. 2553, 2558, 37 L. Ed.2d 669 (1973)). Relying in part on the appellee's economic motivation, the Court also answered the "closer question" about the proper *423 label for informational pamphlets that were concededly Copr. © West 2001 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works