Document: 374 U.S. 424 83 S.Ct. 1759 10 L.Ed.2d 983 Agnes K. HEAD, doing business as Lea County Publishing Co., et al., Appellants,v.NEW MEXICO BOARD OF EXAMINERS IN OPTOMETRY. No. 392. Argued April 15 and 16, 1963. Decided June 17, Carol J. Head, New York City, for appellants. Earl E. Hartley, Santa Fe, N.M., Robert Pyatt, Gallup, appellee. Archibald Cox, Sol. Gen., the United States, amicus curiae, by special leave of Court. Opinion Court Mr. Justice STEWART, announced WHITE. 1 This case comes to us on appeal from Supreme Mexico. One appellants, owns a newspaper in Hobbs, The other appellant, Permian Basin Radio Corporation, operates radio station there. Hobbs is southeastern corner State, close Texas border, much area served both lies Texas. appellants were enjoined accepting or publishing within State Mexico optometrist's advertising found be violation law. claim that state law, applied, imposes an unlawful burden interstate commerce. also argues regulation has been preempted Communications Act 1934.1 We noted probable jurisdiction, 371 900, 207, 9 163, invited Solicitor General express Government's views concerning question federal preemption. have concluded judgment should affirmed. 2 Section 67—7—13 Statutes Annotated deals generally with practice optometry. It prohibits several varieties unauthorized practice, forbids even licensed practitioners employing certain sales techniques, such house-to-house canvassing, peddling streets highways, offering lenses frames premiums.2 prohibits: 3 purpose this provision, according Mexico, 'protect * citizens against evils price-advertising methods tending satisfy needs their pocketbooks rather than remedial requirements eyes.' 70 N.M. 90, 94, 370 P.2d 811, 813. Similar laws enacted many States assure high standards professional competence.3 4 facts stated complaint not disputed. Appellants received published advertisements Abner Roberts, optometrist who resided conducted his Texas, just few miles east Hobbs. In words complaint, consisted 'the quotation prices eyeglasses spectacles, discounts offered spectacles.' conceded violated § 67—7—13(m). Finding statute applicable violated, trial court each 'from any nature Roberts which quotes terms moderate prices, low lowest guaranteed glasses, satisfaction guaranteed, similar import *.' affirmed, ruling injunction did unlawfully commerce State's jurisdiction had ousted legislation. 811. I. 5 Without doubt, appellants' are engaged commerce, unquestionably imposed some restraint upon But these alone do add up unconstitutional As we said Huron Portland Cement Co. v. City Detroit, 362 440, 80 813, 852, upholding application Detroit smoke abatement ordinance ships international commerce: 'In determining whether undue it must borne mind Constitution when 'conferring Congress never intended cut off legislating all subjects relating health, life, safety citizens, though legislation might indirectly affect country. Legislation, great variety ways, may persons without constituting it, meaning Constitution'. Sherlock Alling, 93 99, 103, 23 L.Ed. 819; Austin Tennessee, 179 343, 21 132, 45 224; Louisville & Nashville R. Commonwealth Kentucky, 183 503, 22 95, 46 298; Minnesota Rate Cases, Simpson Shepard, 230 352, 33 729, 57 1511; Boston Maine Armburg, 285 234, 52 336, 76 729; Collins American Buslines, Inc., 350 528, 582, 100 672.' U.S., at 443—444, S.Ct., 6 Like case, here involved measure directly addressed protection public thus falls most traditional concept what compendiously known police power.4 legitimacy precise expressly established. Williamson Lee Optical 348 483, 75 461, 99 563. A law struck down mere showing its administration affects way. 'State regulation, based power, does discriminate operate disrupt required uniformity, constitutionally stand.' supra, 448, 818. 7 suggested statute, alike 'any person' discriminates such. Nor can find impinges requires uniformity regulation. pointed no regulations imposing conflicting duties, nor readily imagine any. Colorado Anti-Discrimination Comm'n Continental Air Lines, 372 714, 1022, 84. hold applied prevent publication proscribed price advertising, impose prohibited commerce.5 II. 8 dealing contention Mexico's regulate Federal Act, begin noting validity cannot judged reference broad statements about 'comprehensive' under Act.6 '(T)he 'question commissions acting so far exercised exclusive belongs exclude answered particular case.' Statements 'exclusive jurisdiction' beg only controversial question: make exclusive.' People California Zook, 336 725, 731, 69 841, 844, 1005. Kelly Washington ex rel. Foss 302 1, 10—13, 58 87, 82 3. areas inherently requiring national uniformity,7 our decisions clear statutes, otherwise valid, upheld unless there 'such actual conflict between two schemes stand same area, (or) evidence congressional design preempt field.' Florida Lime Avocado Growers Paul, 373 141, 1210, 1217. specific provisions chiefly relied support Permian's those governing granting, renewal, revocation broadcasting licenses.8 Under standard 'public interest, convenience, necessity,' Commission consider wide factors passing fitness applicant. argued content one considered, itself occasion interpreted authority.9 Further, authority promulgate general subject guidance broadcasters. See Broadcasting 347 284, 289—290, 74 593, 98 699. grant argued, sufficient oust advertising. Assuming correct statement Commission's authority, nevertheless persuaded field excluded kind involved. regulatory power given agency convinces could supplant detailed practices, particularly was accompanied substantive necessity.'10 license plausible substitute 'traditional' torts crimes committed through use radio. material difference respect less statutory absence positive legislative intent contrary, believe fundamentally local concern. 11 Finally, system, stands obstacle full effectiveness statute. No remotely called attention. apparently viewed complementing function, way it.11 724, 1027, satisfied 'at least long (Commission) remains 'dormant unexercised,' will frustrate part legislation.'12 12 Affirmed. 13 DOUGLAS concurs result. 14 BRENNAN (concurring). I agree attack unreasonable merit therefore join Part Court's opinion. Supremacy Clause—the preempts matter regulation—is not, however, easily answered. Although conclude too prevail, think appropriate separately my reasons reaching For recently held, Farmers Educational Cooperative Union, etc. WDAY, 360 525, 79 1302, 1407, displaced defamation insofar conflicted 'equal time' aims 315. Cf. Station WOW, Johnson, 326 120, 65 1475, 89 2092; Allen B. Dumont Laboratories Carroll, Cir., 184 F.2d 153. What arise relevant require different conclusion case? 16 that, says, FCC's powers 'governing licenses.' If sanction apply practices forbids, basis statute's preemptive effect would removed. disclaimed attempting minor deviations indiscretions programming cumbersome weapons criminal penalties refusal revocation.' Regents University System Georgia 338 586, 602, 370, 378, 94 363.1 led 1960, recommendations Attorney General,2 amend authorize money forfeitures, 47 U.S.C. 503(b), short-term licenses, 307(d). amendments strengthened preexisting issue cease-and-desist orders, 312(b). more discriminating tools 'in violations situations where suspension appear appropriate.'3 17 prompt new sanctions. Some stations 'whose records indicated need closer supervision' limited licenses.4 Forfeitures 'violations warrant proceedings';5 orders issued first time broadcast cases.6 Thus infractions heretofore gone formally unregulated now being dealt because sanctions commensurate gravity offense. 18 say before 1960 cancellation useful curbing abuses policed drastic Indeed, informal policing complaints success precisely 'death sentence' imposed. 'The licensing FCC,' commentator said, 'hangs like constant Damocles' sword over broadcasting.'7 regularly reported number resolved 'informal adjustment,' recourse formal hearings, proceedings.8 Commission, appears, sparingly invoking 'powerful working favor, theoretical threat renewal always present *. (I)f arises accuses violating FCC notification respondent fact result immediate settlement cases.'9 19 seems me, then, nondisplacement bar rest neither practical inability forbidden, want Actually, concerned almost commercial began. Advertising early days source embarrassment concern predecessor, Commission.10 principal complained very aspect sponsorship concerned—'direct' First Annual Conference, meeting 1922 invitation Secretary Hoover, strongly recommended 'that direct service absolutely *.'11 At lost during '20's because, among abuses, indulged excessively 'direct including quoting prices.'12 And until passage 1934, members continued hope free commercials—or devoid form objected to—might become reality.13 Even representatives industry shared time.14 20 advent 1930's foreclosed possibility commercials, shifted attention appraisal air. 1928, example, Counsel held network cigarette advertising—while proceedings individual licensee-might militate requisite finding interest.'15 During mid-1930's, moreover, repeatedly warned excesses offensive listening constitute grounds license.16 However, appears withdrawn solely reason. Rather, employed threat, effective one, report settled warnings outside administrative machinery. Recourse solutions extensive 1940. Since World War II, followed policy puts emphasis quality commercials. 1946 'Blue Book,' although cataloguing various content, disavowed intention 'advertising excessive ratio program *.'17 Book' stated, regarding forms abuse: desire length, irritating qualities plugs.'18 There recent sings renewed but nothing approach pervasive superintendence 1930's.19 event seemed Trade field, false, misleading deceptive designed television broadcast. While consistently licensees FTC 'would raise serious questions operating interest,' largely Commission.20 pattern tests determine matter. test matter, broadcasting, clearly 'by admitting supervision Growers, 143, 1218. Nothing yield suggests view field. Co-operative supra. 131—132, 1482, decreed displacement respects, recognized respects constitutional. second test, exclusively occupy apposite lacking. sure, '(n)o lines divide waves, essential efficient facilities.' Nelson Bros. Bond Mortgage 289 266, 279, 53 627, 633, 77 1166. language read construing mandate ouster perfect uniformity.21 General, brief concedes recognition survival remedies—particularly common-law tort 24 Rather regulations, suggest standing embodied First, contains 'saving clause,' 414, providing 'Nothing chapter contained shall abridge alter remedies existing common addition remedies.' Of course provision resolve problems, Arrow Transportation Southern 658, 671, n. 22, 984, 991, 52, inclusion plainly inconsistent unavoidable.22 Second, comprehensive title telephone telegraph facilities, Sanders Station, 309 470, 474, 60 693, 84 869—yet means communications saved (not regulated statute)—e.g., manner identified announced, 317; uttering 'obscene, indecent, profane language' air, 1464; transmission contain fraudulent 1343; cf. 509. failure nondeceptive surely deprive ousted. 25 brings me third test—whether 'both enforced impairing 142, criterion reveals basic WDAY. strong interest represented obligation 315 broadcasters political candidates frustrated if altogether defeated broadcaster allegedly defamatory broadcasts. operation converged made inevitable interests scheme. 26 instant contrast, presents dissonance. principally protect consumers evil forbid mass media. Such legislation, health consumers, fraud deception, embodies sort respected. Rice Fe Elevator Corp., 331 218, 230, 67 1146, 1152, 91 1447. simply degree restrict activities holds license. 447—448, 818, 852. 27 requires, either contrary here, FCC, licensee's considers he complied advertising23—in words, accords important deference Moreover, National Association Broadcasters counseled obedience matters. Association, Codes Good Practices television, unmistakably enjoins member 'refuse facilities advertiser good reason doubt integrity advertiser, truth representations, compliance spirit legal requirements';24 Television Code, enjoins: 'Diligence end copy accepted complies pertinent Federal, laws.'25 28 consideration militates giving mandate. able willing understandably share agencies responsibility myriad occasional canons Otherwise well heavy produce 'no-man's land,' Guss Utah Labor Relations Board, 353 598, 609, 601, best selective extensively law.26 That mean partial exemption media, denial rightly expect government.27 III. 29 Our holding today intimates constitutionality superficially broadcasting. system pass muster burdensome interfere substantially overall purposes answers problem situation, factually legally quite distinct, presented nationwide originates sought consumers. exceed scope legitimate involve illegitimate attempt control beyond borders. Bibb Navajo Freight 359 520, 962, 1003; Pacific Arizona Sullivan, 325 761, 775, 1515, 1523, 1915. Third, sustain applications threaten impossible transmit broadcasts sponsorship.28 protected exercise broadcaster's access All decides equally news media 48 Stat. 1064, amended, 151 seq. '(i) Either person solicitors agents give eyeglasses, spectacles lenses, mountings, premium inducement subscription book, set books, magazines, magazine, periodical publication, purchase goods, wares merchandise. '(k) making house canvass associates selling, soliciting sale frames, eye examinations optometrical services. '(l) notwithstanding peddlers.' '(m) whatsoever discount mountings 'moderate prices,' 'low 'lowest 'guaranteed glasses,' 'satisfaction guaranteed,' import.' Ark.Stat.Ann. 72—815 (1957 Replacement); Cal.Bus. Professions 3129; Del.Code Ann., Tit. 24, 2113; Fla.Stat.Ann. §§ 463.11, 463.14; Hawaii Rev.Laws 68—9(d) (1960 Supp.); Ind.Stat.Ann. 63—1018a(e), 63—1019(f) (1961); Ky.Rev.Stat. 320.300; La.Rev.Stat. 37:1063; Mich.Stat.Ann. 14.648(i) (1961 Supp.), Comp.Laws 1948, 338.258; Minn.Stat.Ann. 148.57(3); Mo.Ann.Stat. 336.110; Mont.Rev.Codes 66—1302(11); Neb.Rev.Stat. 71—148; Nev.Rev.Stat. 636:300(10); N.J.Stat.Ann. 45:12—11(h) (1962 N.C.Gen.Stat. 90—124(9); N.Dak.Cent.Code 43—13—29; Okla.Stat.Ann., 59, 943; Ore.Rev.Stat. 683.140(6); Pa.Stat.Ann., 63, 237; R.I.Gen.Laws 5—35—22; S.C.Code Laws 56—1075; S.Dak.Code 27.0707(6) Tenn.Code Ann. 63—815; Va.Code 54 388, par. 2(d); Wash.Rev.Code 18.53.140; W.Va.Code 2937 Wis.Stat.Ann. 153.10. therefore, seeks justify attenuated theory economic well-being profession better performance interest. Baldwin G. A. F. Seelig, 294 511, 522—523, 55 497, 1032. Compare Semler Oregon Board Dental Examiners, 608, 570, 1086. decree below preventing communication residents. argument rejected Railway Express Agency York, 106, 463, 533, valid prohibiting display trucks operated States. E.g., 319 190, 213, 63 997, 1008, 87 1344 ('wide powers'), id., 217, 1010 ('comprehensive promote realize vast potentialities radio'); Pottsville 134, 137, 437, 439, 656 ('unified industry'). involves technical matters frequency allocation, exclusive. 301. Hines Davidowitz, 312 61 399, 85 581. 303(j), 307(a), (d), 308(a), 309(a), 312. cited instances analogous considered. See, e.g., Bankers Life Ins. F.C.C. 455; WSBC, 293; Oak Leaves 298. see KFKB Ass'n Comm'n, App.D.C. 79, 670. Interstate Commerce Los Angeles, 280 68—70, 50 53, 56, 163. 153, censorship motion pictures shown act 'communications containing obscene language, meaning.' 303(m)(1)(D). directed following policy: localities states alcoholic beverages would, course, since adherence located, especially expressive locality relative safety, morals, Obviously, true law.' Letter Sen. Edwin C. Chairman Senate Committee Foreign Commerce, August 11, 1949, Pike Fischer Reg., 593—594. urge three additional reversal. Each disposed briefly. deprives them property, Due Process Clause. Ferguson Skrupa, 726, 1028, 93. appellant Head claims her right privileges immunities citizenship. Privileges Immunities Clause Fourteenth Amendment create naked conduct Madden 83, 92—93, 406, 410, 590. contended constitutes invalid freedom speech Amendment. courts, reserved notice Rule 10, 2, Rules Court, 'Only forth fairly comprised therein considered court.' 15, 1(c)(1). H.R.Rep. 1800, 86th Cong., 2d Sess. U.S.Code Cong. Adm.News, p. 3516 ('The presently authorized invoke flout cease desist orders. Revocation, amounts death sentence licensee. community Because severity, seldom ever invoked.'). also, Smead, Freedom Speech (1959), 3; Note, Regulation Television, 73 Harv.L.Rev. 386, 390 (1959); Broadcast Licensee's Past Conduct Determinant Public Interest, U. Pitt.L.Rev. 157, 160 (1961). comment author case: reluctance revocation, lack suspend licenses importance customary Socolow, Law (1939), Not deterrent lesser violations—in addition, controls constituted indirect parties primarily fault cases abuses—the networks sponsors themselves—and inequitable unduly harsh. Deceptive Media, December 30, 1959, Reg. 1901, 1918; Advertising, 56 Col.L.Rev. 1018, 1049 (1956). letter President, summarized recommendation follows: 'Second, conferred licensee fails withdraw permanently—a severe rarely. actions pursuant it. sanctions, include temporary conditional Report President 1905. prior Hearings Subcommittee S. 1333, 80th 1st 14, 51. 17; S.Rep. 1857, 4, 8—10. provided House bill originally violations, periods days. Committee, suspension, dropped final bill. generally, amendments, Enforcement Provisions Fed. B.J. (1963). F.C.C.Ann.Rep. 47—48 (1962); Times, July 1961, 37, col. 2. 1934 presumably possessed shorter maximum, rule maximum-period granted. amendment was, reaffirm existence three-year maximum. 8—9. 46—47 (1962). forfeiture licensee, paid $50,000. 54. 40 1952, 66 717, invoked involving violations. Schwartz, Antitrust FCC: Problem Network Dominance, 107 Pa.L.Rev. 753, 769 (1959). (1936); (1938); (1941); 30 63; 1048 '(t)he net raised eyebrow.' 170 speeches Commissioners often significant impact licensees. Programming, Communication Research, 993, 996 Woll, Administrative Law: Informal (1963), 139. Emery, Government: Responsibilities Regulations (1961), 11—13; Moser Lavine, (1947), 42, 43; Perry, Weak Spots Broadcasting, 177 Annals Am.Acad.Pol. Soc.Sci. 24—25 (1935). Quoted Service Responsibility Licensees (1946), 41. Ibid. explained prohibit fully convinced heard side concede merchandise serve market, rendered. commission knows thousands letters country complaining practices.' F.R.C.Ann.Rep. 168—169 (1928). 6, 71st Sess., pt. 5, 192; 230. speculate prohibition difficulties Sweden experienced ban 3, 8, 4. 13, pp. 1705—1706. Durstine, Future 147, 149 32, 1928—1929 Opinions Counsel, 77, 81—82. past amount censorship, partly ground 'necessary distinction restrictions placed intelligence demand limitations propaganda, obtain success, need.' Id., 81. Shortly after issuance Counsel's opinion, asked Senator Dill appearance thought 'through determination handle objectionable advertising.' replied, 'I so, Dill, little trouble power. improve programs.' Knickerbocker 76; Hammond-Calumet 321; 455. Ben McGlashan, 145, 152, dismissed 'manifestly law' suggestion 'licensees duty examining into propriety Ass'n, Governmental Program Content Geo.Wash.L.Rev. 312, 317 (1951). 47. 56. WREC Service, 1323, 1350—1351, 1358—1359; Liberty 411, 414; 54—55 Notice, 'Double Billing' Practices, March, 7, 1962, 175; Sam Morris, 197; Hale Hale, Competition Control II: 585, 603—607 Liaison Between Relating False Misleading TV Feb. 21, 1957, 1262. assumed 540—542; Davis, 154, 156—157 instituted referring Commission. (1940); (1941). 1957 liaison matters, 1923; keeping informed rulings 44 surveys 58—65; 31—33; 37 Notre Dame Law. 524 36 St. John's L.Rev. 274 U.C.L.A.L.Rev. 417 activity instead FCC. Several suggestion. rarely accorded effect, Bedno Fast, Wis.2d 471, 95 N.W.2d 396. publishers exempted false 54(b). Thus, air tends indirect, sponsor, and, occasionally, agency. Colgate-Palmolive 310 89. equipped desirous assuming essentially complements prohibitions. Comment, Bait Yale L.J. 830, 845—846 (1960). preemption overriding 1076 (1956), FTC's 808, 811—813 Compare, Kroeger Stahl, 248 121, with, Western Union Telegraph 207 Ga. 675, S.E.2d 878; Utility Com'rs, D.C., F.Supp. 761; RCA Communications, Inc. Patchogue 2071. 72—73; Lotteries, 1952 Wis.L.Rev. 177, 180—181. 387—388 322—323 Acting Paul Walker 594. 430, 445. c. V; 177; Legislation Affecting 1951—1952, 261 (1952); 830 types necessarily represent Equal Protection Packer Corp. Utah, 105, 108 110, 273, 274, 643. Calif.Bus. Prof.Code 17502, amended 1951 exempt prohibitions 'broadcasts publishes advertisement faith, knowledge deceptive, character.' 393—395

Category: 9