There the Court found that the content of non-misleading commercial speech can be constitutionally regulated only when a substantial government interest is at stake, the regulation directly advances that interest, and the regulation is no more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S. The standard for regulating the content of commercial speech was first articulated by the Supreme Court in Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corp. However, the state may place reasonable restrictions upon the time, place, and manner of lawyer advertising, so long as the content or subject matter is not regulated. If the content of the advertisement is not misleading, the state may regulate it only when there is a substantial government interest being served. Under the “Commercial Speech Doctrine,” a state may totally prohibit misleading advertising and may impose restrictions if the particular content or method of advertising is inherently misleading or if experience demonstrates that the advertising is subject to abuse. Lawyer advertising, as a form of commercial speech, receives a level of constitutional protection that is above unprotected speech (e.g., false, deceptive or misleading statements or advertisements concerning unlawful activities) but below that provided completely protected speech (e.g., political statements). 2691, 53 L.Ed.2d 810 (1977), the Court extended the “Commercial Speech Doctrine” to lawyer advertising, holding that a total prohibition on the advertisement of routine legal services is unconstitutional.
COMMERCIAL SPEECH CENTRAL HUDSON TEST QUIZLET FREE
Based on the public’s right to receive the free flow of commercial information, the Court held that commercial speech is protected First Amendment speech and may not be prohibited absolutely. 1817, 48 L.Ed.2d 346 (1976), the United States Supreme Court opined that commercial speech is entitled to some protection. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, 425 U.S.
0 kommentar(er)
