Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPost, Robert
dc.date2021-11-25T13:34:19.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:36:45Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:36:45Z
dc.date.issued2006-01-01T00:00:00-08:00
dc.identifierfss_papers/173
dc.identifier.citationRobert Post, Transparent and efficient markets: compelled commercial speech and coerced commercial Association in United Foods, Zauderer, and Abood, 40 VAL. UL REV. 555 (2005).
dc.identifier.contextkey1581057
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/982
dc.description.abstractIn recent years the Court has decided three cases that address the compelled subsidization of commercial speech. Each of these cases involves a federal statute that creates an industry board empowered to tax producers of a specific agricultural product in order to promote and stabilize the market in that product. Taken together, the decisions in this trilogy evidence manifest and disturbing confusion about the constitutional status of commercial speech. At stake in this confusion is the extent to which First Amendment protections for commercial speech will invalidate regulations that now routinely require commercial actors to disclose information to promote transparent and efficient markets.
dc.titleTransparent and Efficient Markets: Compelled Commercial Speech and Coerced Commercial Association in United Foods, Zauderer, and Abood
dc.source.journaltitleFaculty Scholarship Series
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T11:36:45Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/173
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1172&context=fss_papers&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Transparent_and_Efficient_Mark ...
Size:
1.652Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record