Justices side with 'The Slants,' find offensive trademarks law unconstitutional
The Supreme Court on Monday struck down part of a law that bans offensive trademarks in a ruling that is expected to help the Washington Redskins in their legal fight over the team name.
The justices ruled that the 71-year-old trademark law barring disparaging terms infringes free speech rights.
The ruling is a victory for the Asian-American rock band called The Slants." The case was also closely watched for the impact it would have on the separate dispute involving the Washington Redskins football team.
Slants founder Simon Tam tried to trademark the band name in 2010 and in 2011, but the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office denied the request twice on the ground that it disparages Asians. A federal appeals court in Washington later said the law barring offensive trademarks is unconstitutional.
"This shows that the Supreme Court values freedom of speech as an inherent civil right," Tam told KATU. "We don't get to just shut other people down because we find what they have to say disagreeable."
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.
"I wanted to choose the name to honor the work of Asian American activists who have been re-appropriating 'slant' in a self-empowering way for decades," Tam said. "We need to stop treating racial slurs as the ultimate be-all of civil rights. We have much bigger struggles. This is just a symptom of institutionalized discrimination in our country."
The Redskins made similar arguments after the trademark office ruled in 2014 that the name offends American Indians and canceled the team's trademark. A federal appeals court in Richmond put the team's case on hold while waiting for the Supreme Court to rule in the Slants case.
In his opinion for the court, Justice Samuel Alito rejected arguments that trademarks are government speech, not private speech. Alito also said trademarks are not immune from First Amendment protection as part of a government program or subsidy.
Despite intense public pressure to change the name, Redskins owner Dan Snyder has refused, saying it "represents honor, respect and pride."
In the Slants case, government officials argued that the law did not infringe on free speech rights because the band was still free to use the name even without trademark protection.
"At the end of the day, the band is as much about art as it is activism," Tam said. "I never thought it was wrong. My community always supported us."
In protest, the band released a song appropriately titled, "From the Heart." Some of the lyrics read, "don't make the pen a weapon and censor our intelligence," and "the language of oppression will lose to education."
A federal appeals court had sided with the Slants in 2015, saying First Amendment protects "even hurtful speech that harms members of oft-stigmatized communities."
In the Redskins' case, the football team received trademark protections that include blocking the sale of counterfeit merchandise, and working to pursue a brand development strategy.