Compelled Commercial Speech

Question 1

Glickman v. Wileman Bros. (1997)

Answer 1

Compelled Commercial Speech, Federal fee for generic advertising of stone fruits upheld as economic policy to stimulate generic demand for a market. Central Hudson Test doesn’t apply because compulsory funding for advertising does not raise free speech concerns.

Question 2

United States v. United Foods, Inc. (2001)

Answer 2

Compelled Commercial Speech, Viewpoint Discrimination, Federal fee for mushroom advertising held invalid because large mushroom producer disagreed with message (preferred to convey message that their product was superior). Distinct from Glickman (stone fruits) because there fees were ancillary to broader collective scheme, but here fees were principle object of regulation.

Question 3

Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association (2005)

Answer 3

Compelled Commercial Speech, Fees for beef advertising upheld as government speech, not the Beef Board’s speech. Silent on promotion of a particular message.