Matal v. Tam

Simon Tam, founder of the Asian-American rock band "The Slants," sought to register the band's name as a trademark. The United States Patent and Trademark Office refused registration under the Lanham Act's disparagement clause, asserting that "slants" disparaged persons of Asian descent. Tam appealed, and the Federal Circuit held the clause unconstitutional. The Supreme Court affirmed, ruling 8-0 that the disparagement clause violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. The Court found the clause constituted viewpoint-based discrimination by denying registration to marks expressing a disfavored viewpoint while permitting those expressing a favorable one. It rejected the government's argument that trademark registration is a government subsidy immune from First Amendment scrutiny, emphasizing that such regulation cannot penalize offensive speech.

The Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit, holding that the disparagement clause is facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment as it constitutes viewpoint-based discrimination, and reversed the USPTO's denial of the trademark application.

Whether the disparagement clause of the Lanham Act, which prohibits registration of trademarks that may disparage persons, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, violates the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause.

The ruling invalidated the disparagement clause, permitting registration of potentially offensive trademarks and directly resolving the long-standing Washington Redskins trademark dispute. It reinforced that the government cannot withhold benefits based on the perceived offensiveness of speech, marking a major victory for free speech protection in commercial contexts and significantly impacting trademark law and First Amendment jurisprudence.