No Separation of Meat and Milk
The Institute for Justice reports that the Supreme Court today vacated a 2004 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit that said the "Got Milk?" advertising campaign violates the First Amendment rights of dairy farmers who are forced to pay for it even though they object to the message that all milk is pretty much the same. The reversal was expected in the wake of last week's Supreme Court decision upholding the "Beef: It's What's for Dinner" campaign--although it was not inconceivable that, after ruling in 1997 that forcibly funded peach ads were constitutional, deciding in 2001 that generic mushroom ads were unconstitutional, and determining last week that beef-boosting ads were constitutional, the Court would change its mind yet again.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
How are they deciding these cases, coin flip?
Is this as bad as taxing smokers to give to orgs with the sole purpose of villifying and demonizing them?