Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988

Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp. - Significance, Teaching Americans To Use Condoms, Political Speech And Commercial Speech, When The Government May Regulate Commercial Speech

postal york court appellant

Appellant

The United States Postal Service

Appellee

Youngs Drug Products Corporation

Appellant's Claim

The postal service should be allowed to ban the mailing of unsolicited advertisements about condoms.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

David A. Strauss

Chief Lawyers for Appellee

Jerold S. Solovy, Robert L. Graham, Laura A. Kaster

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Thurgood Marshall (writing for the Court), Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting

None (William J. Brennan, Jr., did not participate)

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

24 June 1983

Decision

The postal service could not ban unsolicited advertisements for contraceptives.

Related Cases

  • Valentine v. Chrestensen, 316 U.S. 52 (1942).
  • National Life Ins. Co. v. Phillips Publishing, Inc., 793 F.Supp. 627 (1992).
  • Gordon and Breach Science Publishers S.A. v. American Institute of Physics, 859 F.Supp. 1521 (1994).

Further Readings

  • Gartner, Michael. Advertising and the First Amendment. New York: Priority Press, 1989.
  • Hemmer, Joseph. The Supreme Court and the First Amendment. New York: Praeger, 1986.
  • Middleton, Kent. The Law of Public Communication. White Plains, New York: Longman, 1988.

Additional Topics

Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp. - Significance

The Supreme Court provided a definition of "commercial speech." It identified criteria providing commercial speech with "qualified but substantial protection" under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has placed political speech at the heart of the First Amendment, which exists to promote informed self government. In part, the Court has protected artistic expression because it can serve as a ve…

Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp. - Teaching Americans To Use Condoms

Youngs Drug Products Corporation manufactured, distributed, and sold condoms under various brand names. Youngs marketed its products primarily through sales to wholesalers. The latter in turn sold them to retailer pharmacists who then provided them to individual customers. Youngs used different techniques to publicize and promote its products. In conjunction with its wholesalers and retailers, the…

Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp. - Political Speech And Commercial Speech

Eight justices affirmed the district court's decision, with Justice Marshall writing the Court's opinion. Marshall's opinion directly addressed the characteristics distinguishing commercial speech. If the pamphlets were a form of political speech, they were fully protected by the Constitution and not subject to governmental regulation. If they were commercial in nature, then they enjoyed only a le…

Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp. - When The Government May Regulate Commercial Speech

Marshall advanced two criteria for determining whether commercial speech enjoys First Amendment protection. One must ask if the statements were illegal or deceptive. They must also ask if banning the speech serves any substantial governmental interest. In the case of commercial speech, the government can forbid advertising which promotes illegal and criminal acts. It also may outlaw "false, decept…

Boos v. Barry - Significance, The Split Over Part Ii, Parts Iii, Iv, And V, Foreign Embassies [next] [back] Bob Jones University v. United States - Significance, Defining A Charity, Taxes And Religious Freedom, Private Institutions And Segregation, Further Readings

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or