The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
The United States respectfully responds to this Court's order of June 21, 2017, directing the parties to state their positions on the need for oral argument in the above-captioned case.
The United States concurs with appellant Pro-Football, Inc., that oral argument is unnecessary. The Supreme Court's decision in Matal v. Tam, No. 15-1293 (U.S. June 19, 2017) [the Slants case], controls the disposition of this case. Consistent with Tam, the Court should reverse the judgment of the district court and remand the case with instructions to enter judgment in favor of Pro-Football.
No word yet from the other parties that were defending the decision to deny the Redskins trademark registration. But the federal government's position seems clearly right to me, given the logic of Matal v. Tam.