Current:Home > StocksSupreme Court agrees to hear dispute over effort to trademark "Trump Too Small" -Clarity Finance Guides
Supreme Court agrees to hear dispute over effort to trademark "Trump Too Small"
View
Date:2025-04-17 07:03:21
Washington — The Supreme Court said Monday that it will hear a dispute arising from an unsuccessful effort to trademark the phrase "Trump Too Small" to use on t-shirts and hats, a nod to a memorable exchange between then-presidential candidates Marco Rubio and Donald Trump during a 2016 Republican presidential primary debate.
At issue in the case, known as Vidal v. Elster, is whether the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office violated the First Amendment when it refused to register the mark "Trump Too Small" under a provision of federal trademark law that prohibits registration of any trademark that includes a name of a living person unless they've given written consent. The justices will hear arguments in its next term, which begins in October, with a decision expected by June 2024.
The dispute dates back to 2018, when Steve Elster, a California lawyer and progressive activist, sought federal registration of the trademark "Trump Too Small," which he wanted to put on shirts and hats. The phrase invokes a back-and-forth between Trump and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who were at the time seeking the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, during a televised debate. Rubio had made fun of Trump for allegedly having small hands, insinuating that Trump has a small penis.
Elster explained to the Patent and Trademark Office that the mark is "political commentary" targeting Trump and was meant to convey that "some features of President Trump and his policies are diminutive," according to his application. The mark, Elster argued, "is commentary about the substance of Trump's approach to governing as president."
Included as part of his request is an image of a proposed t-shirt featuring the phrase "TRUMP TOO SMALL" on the front, and "TRUMP'S PACKAGE IS TOO SMALL" on the back, under which is a list of policy areas on which he is "small."
An examiner refused to register the mark, first because it included Trump's name without his written consent and then because the mark may falsely suggest a connection with the president.
Elster appealed to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, arguing the two sections of a law known as the Lanham Act applied by the examiner impermissibly restricted his speech. But the board agreed the mark should be denied, resting its decision on the provision of trademark law barring registration of a trademark that consists of a name of a living person without their consent.
But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed, finding that applying the provision of federal trademark law to prohibit registration of Elster's mark unconstitutionally restricts free speech.
"There can be no plausible claim that President Trump enjoys a right of privacy protecting him from criticism," the unanimous three-judge panel wrote in a February 2022 decision.
While the government has an interest in protecting publicity rights, the appellate court said, the "right of publicity does not support a government restriction on the use of a mark because the mark is critical of a public official without his or her consent."
The Biden administration appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that for more than 75 years, the Patent and Trademark Office has been directed to refuse registration of trademarks that use the name of a living person without his or her written consent.
"Far from enhancing freedom of speech, the decision below makes it easier for individuals like respondent to invoke enforcement mechanisms to restrict the speech of others," Biden administration lawyers wrote.
But Elster's attorneys argued the lower court's decision is narrow and "bound to the specific circumstances of this case."
"Unlike other cases in which the Court has reviewed decisions declaring federal statutes unconstitutional, this case involves a one-off as-applied constitutional challenge — one that turns on the unique circumstances of the government's refusal to register a trademark that voices political criticism of a former President of the United States," they told the court.
veryGood! (7)
Related
- Former Syrian official arrested in California who oversaw prison charged with torture
- King Charles urged to acknowledge Britain's legacy of genocide and colonization on coronation day
- Ulta 24-Hour Flash Sale: Take 50% Off Estée Lauder, Kiehl's, Anastasia Beverly Hills, and IT Brushes
- After a serious breach, Uber says its services are operational again
- Could Bill Belichick, Robert Kraft reunite? Maybe in Pro Football Hall of Fame's 2026 class
- Chris Kirkpatrick Shares Which NSYNC Member is the Surprisingly Least Active in the Group Chat
- Ellen Star Sophia Grace Cuddles Her Newborn Baby Boy in Sweet Video
- Data privacy concerns make the post-Roe era uncharted territory
- Juan Soto to be introduced by Mets at Citi Field after striking record $765 million, 15
- Russia claims U.S. planned alleged drone attack on Kremlin as Ukraine's civilians suffer the retaliation
Ranking
- How to watch new prequel series 'Dexter: Original Sin': Premiere date, cast, streaming
- Fans are saddened over the death of Technoblade, a popular Minecraft YouTuber
- Succession's Sarah Snook Was Upset About How She Learned the Show Was Ending After Season 4
- When machine learning meets surrealist art meets Reddit, you get DALL-E mini
- Skins Game to make return to Thanksgiving week with a modern look
- XXXTentacion’s Fatal Shooting Case: 3 Men Found Guilty of Murdering Rapper
- My Holy Grail Smashbox Primer Is 50% Off Today Only: Here's Why You Need to Stock Up
- Russia unlikely to be able to mount significant offensive operation in Ukraine this year, top intel official says
Recommendation
Civic engagement nonprofits say democracy needs support in between big elections. Do funders agree?
Streaming outperforms both cable and broadcast TV for the first time ever
Does your rewards card know if you're pregnant? Privacy experts sound the alarm
Man arrested outside Buckingham Palace after throwing suspected shotgun cartridges over gates, police say
Tree trimmer dead after getting caught in wood chipper at Florida town hall
Families of detained Americans plead for meeting with Biden
King Charles, William and Kate surprise coronation well-wishers outside of Buckingham Palace
Court rules in favor of Texas law allowing lawsuits against social media companies