Inc. v. Rhode Island Liquormart (44 )

The Court's decision in 44 Liquormart drastically altered the analysis for determining whether total bans on truthful advertising are permissible under the First Amendment. Seven of the justices applied the Central Hudson test, as Justice Thomas recognized both Justice Stevens's and Justice O'Connor's application of the fourth prong was much stricter than in previous cases. As Justice Thomas stated, their interpretations, "as a practical matter, go a long way toward the position" of Justice Thomas that complete bans of truthful advertising are always unconstitutional. Thus, after 44 Liquormart, it is unlikely that the Court will uphold any blanket restrictions on truthful commercial speech.