2005 United States Supreme Court case
Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association Full case name Mike Johanns, Secretary of Agriculture, et al v. Livestock Marketing Association, et al Docket no. 03-1164 Citations 544 U.S. 550 (more Argument Oral argument Prior Judgment for Respondents, 207 F. Supp. 2d 992 (D.S.D. 2002); affirmed, 335 F.3d 711 (8th Cir. 2003); cert . granted, 541 U.S. 1062 (2004). Check-offs fund government speech; the government cannot be sued under the First Amendment Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy David Souter · Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer Majority Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Thomas, Breyer Concurrence Thomas Concurrence Breyer Concurrence Ginsburg (in judgment) Dissent Kennedy Dissent Souter, joined by Stevens, Kennedy U.S. Const. amend. I
Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association First Amendment case of the Supreme Court of the United States . At issue was whether a beef producer could be compelled to contribute to beef industry advertising.[ 1]
Facts and prior history [ edit ] Congress charters commodity checkoff programs compelling all producers of certain commodities to contribute to common research and advertising programs. The beef industry is covered by the Beef Promotion and Research Act (1985). Cattle producers disagreeing with the fee and represented by the Livestock Marketing Association sued the Department of Agriculture (USDA) in federal district court. The respondents alleged the government-required fee for advertising was compelled speech and violated their First Amendment right to free speech. The USDA argued the advertising was government speech immune from First Amendment challenge.
The district court and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals had found for the Livestock Marketing Association previously, ruling that the program violated the First Amendment and that the advertising was compelled and not government speech .[ 2]
In a parallel petition (No. 03–1165), the Nebraska Cattlemen sided with the USDA and sued the Livestock Marketing Association. At the Supreme Court, the two cases were consolidated.
The Supreme Court's decision was announced on May 23, 2005, and delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia . The decision was 6–3 in favor of the USDA's position. Check-offs would continue. Advertising by these industry groups was government speech, therefore there was no infringement of First Amendment rights.
The case is starting another trip through the courts, starting in Montana with Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund v. Sonny Perdue [ 3]
The Cattlemen's Beef Board (CBB) and USDA oversee the collection and spending of checkoff funds. Additionally, all producers selling cattle or calves, for any reason and regardless of age or sex, must pay $1-per-head. The buyer generally is responsible for collecting $1-per-head from the seller, but both are responsible for seeing that the dollar is collected and paid.[ 4]
Public displays Statutory religious Public funding Religion in Private religious speech Internal church affairs Taxpayer standing Blue laws Other
Unprotected
Incitement sedition Defamation andfalse speech Fighting words andheckler's veto True threats Obscenity Rosen v. United States United States v. One Book Called Ulysses Roth v. United States One, Inc. v. Olesen Smith v. California Marcus v. Search Warrant MANual Enterprises, Inc. v. Day Jacobellis v. Ohio Quantity of Books v. Kansas Ginzburg v. United States Memoirs v. Massachusetts Redrup v. New York Ginsberg v. New York Stanley v. Georgia United States v. Thirty-seven Photographs Kois v. Wisconsin Miller v. California Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton United States v. 12 200-ft. Reels of Film Jenkins v. Georgia Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. Conrad Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc. Vance v. Universal Amusement Co., Inc. American Booksellers Ass'n, Inc. v. Hudnut People v. Freeman United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc. Reno v. ACLU United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc. Ashcroft v. ACLU I United States v. American Library Ass'n Ashcroft v. ACLU II Nitke v. Gonzales United States v. Williams American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression v. Strickland United States v. Kilbride United States v. Stevens Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass'n FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton Speech integral
Strict scrutiny Overbreadth Vagueness Symbolic speech Content-based Content-neutral
Compelled speech Compelled subsidy
Government grants Government Loyalty oaths School speech Public employees Hatch Act andLicensing and Commercial speech Valentine v. Chrestensen Rowan v. U.S. Post Office Dept. Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Comm'n on Human Relations Lehman v. Shaker Heights Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar Bigelow v. Virginia Virginia State Pharmacy Bd. v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council Linmark Assoc., Inc. v. Township of Willingboro Carey v. Population Services International Bates v. State Bar of Arizona In re Primus Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association Friedman v. Rogers Consol. Edison Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission Metromedia, Inc. v. San Diego In re R.M.J. Hoffman Estates v. The Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. Zauderer v. Off. of Disciplinary Counsel of Supreme Court of Ohio Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities Comm'n of California Posadas de Puerto Rico Assoc. v. Tourism Co. of Puerto Rico San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. U.S. Olympic Committee Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Association Riley v. Nat'l Fed'n of the Blind State University of New York v. Fox Peel v. Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of Illinois City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network Edenfield v. Fane United States v. Edge Broadcasting Co. Ibanez v. Florida Dept. of Business and Professional Regulation, Bd. of Accountancy Lebron v. National Railroad Passenger Corp. Rubin v. Coors Brewing Co. Florida Bar v. Went For It, Inc. 44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island Glickman v. Wileman Brothers & Elliot, Inc. Greater New Orleans Broadcasting Assn., Inc. v. United States Los Angeles Police Department v. United Reporting Publishing Co. United States v. United Foods Inc. Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly Thompson v. Western States Medical Center Nike, Inc. v. Kasky Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Ass'n Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Assn. v. Brentwood Academy Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. United States Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich LPA Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman Matal v. Tam Iancu v. Brunetti Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants Vidal v. Elster Campaign finance Anonymous speech State action Official retaliation Boycotts Prisons
Organizations Future Conduct Solicitation Membership restriction Primaries and elections
From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
