Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp.

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 vehicle for commentary on public issues. With this understanding of the amendment's purpose, the Court had held flatly in Valentine v. Chrestensen (1942) that the Constitution "imposes no . . . restraint on government." regarding the street distribution of "purely commercial advertising."

Bolger and other cases during the 1970s and 1980s modified earlier rulings, and the Court limited government interference with advertising. For the first time, the Court directly defined the difference between commercial and political speech. Although still not according it the absolute protection provided to political and artistic expression, the Court granted commercial speech substantial First Amendment protection.