On May 23, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the federally-mandated beef promotion program against a First Amendment challenge on the basis that the program constituted government speech.1 The Court, however, left open the possibility that the beef check-off could be successfully challenged on First Amendment grounds if it can be shown on remand that the advertisements attribute their generic pro-beef message to the plaintiffs.2 As such, the Court’s ruling does not necessarily end the beef check-off litigation, and is not entirely precedential for the pork check-off litigation that awaits a determination as to whether the Supreme Court will hear the case.
The First Amendment not only protects against limitations on one\u27s speech but against governmenta...
The 2011-12 Supreme Court term was notable for high profile cases about state undocumented immigrant...
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether the mandatory fees imposed by the beef checkoff ...
Over the past thirty-five years, Congress has authorized promotion programs, known as checkoff progr...
On July 8, 2003, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the Federal Dist...
Over the past thirty-five years, Congress has authorized generic promotion programs, known as checko...
The United States Supreme Court, in a six to three decision, on June 25 created a different playing ...
Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association5 was about whether government could compel individual bee...
A major battle in First Amendment free speech rights is raging over the constitutionality of mandato...
In the past fourteen years, the Supreme Court has ruled three separate times on the constitutionalit...
It was like landing two punches in rapid succession to the livestock industry’s checkoff programs. I...
This report begins with a brief introduction to check-off programs and then describes many of the F...
This Comment analyzes the likelihood of whether BPI’s case against ABC News will be decided on the m...
In recent years the Supreme Court has decided a spate of cases about the compelled subsidization of ...
Until recently, the legal status of generic advertising programs seemed questionable. After an initi...
The First Amendment not only protects against limitations on one\u27s speech but against governmenta...
The 2011-12 Supreme Court term was notable for high profile cases about state undocumented immigrant...
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether the mandatory fees imposed by the beef checkoff ...
Over the past thirty-five years, Congress has authorized promotion programs, known as checkoff progr...
On July 8, 2003, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the Federal Dist...
Over the past thirty-five years, Congress has authorized generic promotion programs, known as checko...
The United States Supreme Court, in a six to three decision, on June 25 created a different playing ...
Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association5 was about whether government could compel individual bee...
A major battle in First Amendment free speech rights is raging over the constitutionality of mandato...
In the past fourteen years, the Supreme Court has ruled three separate times on the constitutionalit...
It was like landing two punches in rapid succession to the livestock industry’s checkoff programs. I...
This report begins with a brief introduction to check-off programs and then describes many of the F...
This Comment analyzes the likelihood of whether BPI’s case against ABC News will be decided on the m...
In recent years the Supreme Court has decided a spate of cases about the compelled subsidization of ...
Until recently, the legal status of generic advertising programs seemed questionable. After an initi...
The First Amendment not only protects against limitations on one\u27s speech but against governmenta...
The 2011-12 Supreme Court term was notable for high profile cases about state undocumented immigrant...
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether the mandatory fees imposed by the beef checkoff ...