Jump to full article: The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition, 2001-07-03
Author: Robert S. Greenberger / bob.greenberger@wsj.com1
Intro: Should a company have as much right to free speech about its products as people have to air their political views?
The courts' longtime answer has been no. Even though the First Amendment bars laws "abridging the freedom of speech," the courts have deemed advertising to be an exception. That distinction has allowed government at all levels to impose consumer-protection rules on advertisers, such as the ubiquitous health warnings on cigarette ads.
But a growing number of cases are challenging that concept. The latest example is last week's Supreme Court ruling striking down a tough Massachusetts law restricting tobacco advertising, including a ban on ads within 1,000 feet of schools and children's facilities. . .
Free-speech advocates see great significance in the decision. "Future advertising restrictions can be expected to receive similar skeptical treatment," says David Remes, a First Amendment lawyer who worked on the case on the industry's side.
No one expects advertising to achieve the same constitutional protection that individuals have to free speech. But courts around the nation are narrowing the gap. . .
"To the extent commercial speech becomes assimilated into traditional political speech, it could become a potent engine for government deregulation," says Burt Neuborne, a New York University law professor.
Jump to full article » |