A Washington Redskins helmet on the sidelines of an NFL football game against the Dallas Cowboys in Landover, Maryland. The Supreme Court on Monday struck down part of a law that bans offensive trademarks in a ruling that is expected to help the Redskins in their legal fight over the team name. (AP Photo/Nick Wass, File)

A Washington Redskins helmet on the sidelines of an NFL football game against the Dallas Cowboys in Landover, Maryland. The Supreme Court on Monday struck down part of a law that bans offensive trademarks in a ruling that is expected to help the Redskins in their legal fight over the team name. (AP Photo/Nick Wass, File)

Justices say law on offensive trademarks is unconstitutional

By Sam Hananel / Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday struck down part of a law that bans offensive trademarks, ruling in favor of an Asian-American rock band called the Slants and giving a major boost to the Washington Redskins in their separate legal fight over the team name.

The justices were unanimous in saying that the 71-year-old trademark law barring disparaging terms infringes free speech rights guaranteed in the Constitution’s First Amendment.

“It offends a bedrock First Amendment principle: Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend,” Justice Samuel Alito said in his opinion for the court.

Slants founder Simon Tam tried to trademark the band name in 2011, but the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office denied the request on the ground that it disparages Asians. A federal appeals court in Washington later said the law barring offensive trademarks is unconstitutional and the Supreme Court agreed.

The Redskins made similar arguments after the trademark office ruled in 2014 that the name offends American Indians and canceled the team’s trademark. That case, before a federal appeals court in Richmond, had been on hold while the Supreme Court considered the Slants case.

Tam insisted he was not trying to be offensive, but wanted to transform a derisive term into a statement of pride. The Redskins also contend their name honors American Indians, but the team has faced decades of legal challenges from Indian groups that say the name is racist.

Tam said the band was “beyond humbled and thrilled” with the ruling.

“This journey has always been much bigger than our band: it’s been about the rights of all marginalized communities to determine what’s best for ourselves,” he said.

Despite intense public pressure to change the Redskins name, team owner Dan Snyder has refused, saying in the past that it “represents honor, respect and pride” for Native Americans. Snyder issued a quick statement after Monday’s decision: “I am THRILLED. Hail to the Redskins.”

Redskins attorney Lisa Blatt said the court’s decision effectively resolves the Redskins’ longstanding dispute with the government.

“The Supreme Court vindicated the team’s position that the First Amendment blocks the government from denying or cancelling a trademark registration based on the government’s opinion,” Blatt said.

Trademark office spokesman Paul Fucito said officials are reviewing the court’s ruling and planned to issue further guidance on how they will review trademark applications.

Indian groups opposing the Redskins said the ruling does not change the fact that the name “is a dictionary-defined racial slur.”

“If the NFL wants to live up to its statements about placing importance on equality, then it shouldn’t hide behind these rulings, but should act to the end this hateful and degrading slur,” said a joint statement from the National Congress of American Indians and the group Change the Mascot.

The ruling means offensive trademarks can no longer be denied, even for names that intend to disparage individuals or groups of people, said Megan Carpenter, dean at the University of New Hampshire School of Law and an expert on trademark law.

While the justices all agreed on the outcome, they split in their rationale. Alito rejected arguments that the government has an interest in preventing speech that is offensive to certain groups.

“Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express the thought we hate,” Alito said in a part of his opinion joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer.

Writing separately, Justice Anthony Kennedy stressed that the ban on disparaging trademarks was a clear form of viewpoint discrimination forbidden under the First Amendment.

“A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all,” Kennedy said in an opinion joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Justice Neil Gorsuch took no part in the case, which was argued before he joined the court.

Government officials said the law did not infringe on free speech rights because the band was still free to use the name even without trademark protection. The same is true for the Redskins, but the team did not want to lose the legal protections that go along with a registered trademark. The protections include blocking the sale of counterfeit merchandise and working to pursue a brand development strategy.

Critics of the law said the trademark office has been wildly inconsistent over the years in deciding what terms are too offensive to warrant trademark protection. The government has in the past rejected trademarks for the terms “Heeb” and “Injun,” but allowed those for companies such as Baked By A Negro bakery products, Midget Man condoms, and Dago Swagg clothing.

Associated Press writer Stephen Whyno contributed to this report.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Local News

Olivia Vanni / The Herald 
The Mukilteo Lighthouse. Built in 1906, it’s one of the most iconic landmarks in Snohomish County.
The Mukilteo Lighthouse. Built in 1906, it’s one of the most iconic landmarks in Snohomish County. (Olivia Vanni / The Herald)
Mukilteo mayor vetoes council-approved sales tax

The tax would have helped pay for transportation infrastructure, but was also set to give Mukilteo the highest sales tax rate in the state.

Marysville Mayor Jon Nehring gives the state of the city address at the Marysville Civic Center on Wednesday, Jan. 31, 2024, in Marysville, Washington. (Ryan Berry / The Herald)
Marysville council approves interim middle housing law

The council passed the regulations to prevent a state model code from taking effect by default. It expects to approve final rules by October.

x
State audit takes issue with Edmonds COVID grant monitoring

The audit report covered 2023 and is the third since 2020 that found similar issues with COVID-19 recovery grant documentation.

Bothell
Bothell man pleads guilty to sexual abuse of Marysville middle schoolers

The man allegedly sexually assaulted three students in exchange for vapes and edibles in 2022. His sentencing is set for Aug. 29.

Larsen talks proposed Medicaid cuts during Compass Health stop in Everett

Compass Health plans to open its new behavioral health center in August. Nearly all of the nonprofit’s patients rely on Medicaid.

District 2 candidates differ in public safety approach

Incumbent Paula Rhyne is facing challenger Ryan Crowther. The third candidate, Jonathan Shapiro, is no longer seeking the seat.

Community members gather for the dedication of the Oso Landslide Memorial following the ten-year remembrance of the slide on Friday, March 22, 2024, at the Oso Landslide Memorial in Oso, Washington. (Ryan Berry / The Herald)
The Daily Herald garners 6 awards from regional journalism competition

The awards recognize the best in journalism from media outlets across Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington.

Guns for sale at Caso’s Gun-A-Rama in Jersey City, New Jersey, which has been open since 1967. (Photo by Aristide Economopoulos/New Jersey Monitor)
After suing, WA gets carveout from Trump administration plan to return gun conversion devices

The Trump administration has agreed to not distribute devices that turn semi-automatic… Continue reading

The Wild Horse Wind and Solar Facility about 16 miles east of Ellensburg in central Washington is part of Puget Sound Energy’s clean energy portfolio. (Courtesy of Puget Sound Energy)
Megabill’s elimination of tax credits for clean energy projects could cost WA $8.7 billion

Washington households could see electricity costs increase $115 per year by 2029; 21,800 workers could lose their jobs by 2030, analysts say.

Everett mayor candidates focus on affordability, city budget in costly race

As incumbent Cassie Franklin seeks a third term in office, three candidates are looking to unseat her.

Everett
Judge sentences man, 73, for intending to have sex with ‘teen’ in Everett

The Arizona man sent explicit images to an agent posing as a 13-year-old. Investigators found images of child sexual abuse on his phone.

State’s draft of climate action plan open for public comment

Residents can submit public comments or climate-related stories online through Aug. 22.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.