S.M. Oliva on Michael Jordan and the Nonsensical Commercial Speech Doctrine

Michael Jordan's infamously petty and bitter behavior has driven him into a prolonged court battle with Chicago supermarket chain Jewel-Osco. At the heart of the matter is the U.S. Supreme Court's infamous "commercial speech doctrine," which S.M. Oliva calls "a convenient constitutional end-run for the government to censor any speech it dislikes."
Interpreting this doctrine, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently suggested that there could be no First Amendment protection for any speech by a business that so much as mentioned a famous celebrity. But free speech shouldn't stop where fame begins, Oliva aruges.
Hide Comments (0)
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 commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?