SUPREME COURT UNANIMOUS: The REDSKINS WIN, with HelP from.....THE SLANTS

The case was brought by a band called the SLANTS, an Asian group, but the Redskins will benefit.


 The result: UNANIMOUS Verdict 8-0, Gorsuch not involved.  READ the decision HERE

The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) denied the

application based on a provision of federal law prohibiting

the registration of trademarks that may “disparage . . . or

bring . . . into contemp[t] or disrepute” any “persons, living

or dead.” 15 U. S. C. §1052(a). We now hold that this

provision violates the Free Speech Clause of the First

Amendment. It offends a bedrock First Amendment principle:

Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend

and

While the government may discriminate based on viewpoint when it comes to speech that is treated as the government’s own speech, trademarks are private speech (albeit protected by the government against certain forms of infringement) and not government speech.

Decision:

There is also a deeper problem with the argument that

commercial speech may be cleansed of any expression

likely to cause offense. The commercial market is well

stocked with merchandise that disparages prominent

figures and groups, and the line between commercial and

non-commercial speech is not always clear, as this case

illustrates. If affixing the commercial label permits the

suppression of any speech that may lead to political or

social “volatility,” free speech would be endangered.

* * *

For these reasons, we hold that the disparagement

clause violates the Free Speech Clause of the First

Amendment. The judgment of the Federal Circuit is

affirmed.