| Venue: |
SCOTUS
|
|
| Facts: |
Nike responds to allegations of sweatshops with some PR. CA law says that
false statements by a corporation are false advertising. |
|
| Posture: |
Suit in CA court. Nike demurs: this is barred by 1A. CA SC finds that
this is commercial speech. |
|
| Issue: |
Two:
- When a corporation participates in public debate, may it be
subjected to liability for factual inaccuracies on the
theory that this is commercial speech?
- If it is commercial speech, does 1A preclude liability?
|
|
| Holding: |
Dismissed-- we should not have taken cert. |
|
| Rule: |
None announced. |
|
| Reasoning: |
We will ot anticipate a question of constitutional law in advance of
the necessity of deciding it. This debate is ongoing. |
|
| Dicta: |
Breyer, dissenting: we've had 34 briefs (including 31 from amici,
and we've had oral arguments. Continuing this lawsuit means
continued expense. |
|