The Importance Of Freedom Of Speech Cases
Is there really freedom of speech in America or are some speeches to offensive to ever be considered free speech? This is exactly the question that is being answered in Lee vs. Tam, which debate s whether a certain word can be considered a racial slur. The Court's decision today plays a monumental role in the way that freedom of speech cases will be handled in the future.
On November 24, 2011, Simon Tam and his band called The Slants, an Oregon based band of Asian Americans, sought to register the brand name under the U.S Trademark Office. The office rejected the request to trademark the name on the notation that the name would disparage towards people of Asian heritage. When the office was asked to specify, the office referred to the disagreement …show more content…
The cases went to the Supreme Court, where both sides were allowed to present their argument. Judge Sotomayer and Robert were both active in asking questions. , while Justice Thomas stayed quiet . The Supreme Court 4-3 outcome was that U.S Office of Trademark was unconstitutional in denying Tam and his band members the name slant. Justice Robert wrote the opinion where he stated that while the words may be offensive, the trademark was not a government entity but a public entity involving citizens. He further goes on to highlight the differences between political speech and commercial speech the latter of which is held to a lower standard of constitutional review (Lee vs Tam, …show more content…
Thomas writes the majority dissent. Where he goes and talks about that while slant may have no intention of being harmful or offensive it can, because the history of that name is one with a negative stigma. That when people first hear the name and they will not know the meaning behind the name. Many can think that it is mocking of people of Asian American descent.
The Supreme Court decision is an example of separation of power. It displays the governments’ power over free speech and its definition of what constitutes free speech and what does not. The free speech doesn’t rely on the opinion of the American government, but that lies in facts and principles. This case comes to correct and to reverse many cases, including the Redskin Baseball cases. The decision will set the tone for future cases and how they are dealt
On November 24, 2011, Simon Tam and his band called The Slants, an Oregon based band of Asian Americans, sought to register the brand name under the U.S Trademark Office. The office rejected the request to trademark the name on the notation that the name would disparage towards people of Asian heritage. When the office was asked to specify, the office referred to the disagreement …show more content…
The cases went to the Supreme Court, where both sides were allowed to present their argument. Judge Sotomayer and Robert were both active in asking questions. , while Justice Thomas stayed quiet . The Supreme Court 4-3 outcome was that U.S Office of Trademark was unconstitutional in denying Tam and his band members the name slant. Justice Robert wrote the opinion where he stated that while the words may be offensive, the trademark was not a government entity but a public entity involving citizens. He further goes on to highlight the differences between political speech and commercial speech the latter of which is held to a lower standard of constitutional review (Lee vs Tam, …show more content…
Thomas writes the majority dissent. Where he goes and talks about that while slant may have no intention of being harmful or offensive it can, because the history of that name is one with a negative stigma. That when people first hear the name and they will not know the meaning behind the name. Many can think that it is mocking of people of Asian American descent.
The Supreme Court decision is an example of separation of power. It displays the governments’ power over free speech and its definition of what constitutes free speech and what does not. The free speech doesn’t rely on the opinion of the American government, but that lies in facts and principles. This case comes to correct and to reverse many cases, including the Redskin Baseball cases. The decision will set the tone for future cases and how they are dealt