Supreme Court Defends Free-Speech Rights Of Advertisers

The Supreme Court, bolstering the free-speech rights of advertisers, ruled Monday the government cannot bar the promotion of lawful products it deems undesirable, a decision that casts doubt on President Clinton’s campaign to ban cigarette ads aimed at young people.

On a 9-0 vote, the court struck down laws in Rhode Island and 10 other states that forbid retailers from advertising their prices for beer, wine or liquor.

“A complete ban on truthful, non-misleading commercial speech” is almost always unconstitutional, wrote Justice John Paul Stevens in one of the court’s most powerful defenses of advertising as valuable, free speech.

Significantly, Stevens stressed there is no “vice exception” to the First Amendment, which would allow a “paternalistic” government to restrict advertising for lawful but suspect products. These range from alcohol and lottery tickets to casino gambling.

“The First Amendment directs us to be especially skeptical of regulations that seek to keep people in the dark for what the government perceives to be their own good,” he said.

Lawyers who represent advertisers called Monday’s opinion a landmark victory.

“This is a monumentally important decision for commercial speech,” said Dan Troy, a Washington attorney who represented the American Advertising Federation and the Magazine Publishers of America. “This is the first time the court has clearly repudiated the government’s paternalistic rationale for restrictions on advertising.”

The court’s opinion did not mention tobacco, but its impact will surely be felt there. Last August, the president proposed a sweeping ban on cigarettes ads that could be seen by young people. For example, hats and T-shirts could not be sold with names or symbols of tobacco product such as “Joe Camel.” Sport events would no longer be permitted to use the tobacco company’s endorsement.

And perhaps broadest of all, magazines, newspapers and other print media would not be permitted to carry tobacco ads, except in simple in black-and-white text.

The proposed regulation has not been put into force yet by the Food and Drug Administration, but a coalition of advertisers and media companies has filed a lawsuit in North Carolina contending it is unconstitutional.