less than 1 minute read

Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp.

Significance, Teaching Americans To Use Condoms, Political Speech And Commercial Speech, When The Government May Regulate Commercial Speech


The United States Postal Service


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)


Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

24 June 1983


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

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988