« Kentucky Governor race | Main | Georgia redistricting »

Nike v Kasky

Two weeks from now, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Nike v. Kasky. Nike ran ads claiming that its workers in overseas factories were well treated. Kasky sued in California state court claiming that Nike had violated California 's Business and Professions Code by making false statements. The questions presented are

1. When a corporation participates in a public debate ... may it be subjected to liability for factual inaccuracies on the theory that its statements are "commercial speech" ... ?

2. Even assuming the California Supreme Court properly characterized such statements as "commercial speech," does the First Amendment, as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, permit subjecting speakers to the legal regime approved by that court in the decision below?

Only the petition and response -- not the briefs on the merits -- are on Findlaw. Goldstein & Howe, counsel for Nike, has many briefs of the merits (from parties and amici) on its blog. [Update -- even more briefs here.]

Two briefs from amici discuss the Nike case from the standpoint of its effect on campaign finance laws. See the brief of the Campaign Legal Center and the brief by the National Voting Rights Institute. Thanks to Trevor Potter and Kisa Danetz for pointing out these latter briefs.