Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/18-302_e29g.pdf
Page Number: 16

Cite as:  588 U. S. ____ (2019) 

1 

Opinion of ROBERTS, C. J. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 18–302 
_________________ 

ANDREI IANCU, UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE 
FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR, 
PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, 
PETITIONER v. ERIK BRUNETTI 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 

[June 24, 2019] 

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS, concurring in part and dissent-

ing in part. 

The  Lanham  Act  directs  the  Patent  and  Trademark 
Office  to  refuse  registration  to  marks  that  consist  of  or 
comprise  “immoral,  deceptive,  or  scandalous  matter.”    15 
U. S. C.  §1052(a).    Although  the  statute  lists  “immoral” 
and “scandalous” separately, the PTO has long read those 
terms together to constitute a unitary bar on “immoral or
scandalous” marks. 

The  Government  concedes  that  the  provision  so  read  is 
broad enough to reach not only marks that offend because 
of their mode of expression (such as vulgarity and profanity) 
but  also  marks  that  offend  because  of  the  ideas  they  con-
vey.  The  Government  urges,  however,  that  the  provision 
can  be  given  a  narrowing  construction—it  can  be  under-
stood  to  cover  only  marks  that  offend  because  of  their 
mode of expression.

The  Court  rejects  that  proposal  on  the  ground  that  it 
would  in  effect  rewrite  the  statute.   I  agree  with  the  ma-
jority  that  the  “immoral”  portion  of  the  provision  is  not 
susceptible  of  a  narrowing  construction  that  would  elimi-
nate its viewpoint bias.  As JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR explains, 
however,  the  “scandalous”  portion  of  the  provision  is  sus-