Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/18-302_e29g.pdf
Page Number: 3

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

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to 
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington,  D. C.  20543,  of  any  typographical  or  other  formal  errors,  in  order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

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] 

JUSTICE KAGAN delivered the opinion of the Court. 
Two  Terms  ago,  in  Matal  v.  Tam,  582  U. S.  ___  (2017), 
this Court invalidated the Lanham Act’s bar on the regis-
tration  of  “disparag[ing]”  trademarks. 
15  U. S. C. 
§1052(a).  Although  split  between  two  non-majority  opin-
ions,  all  Members  of  the  Court  agreed  that  the  provision
violated the First Amendment because it discriminated on 
the  basis  of  viewpoint.    Today  we  consider  a  First 
Amendment  challenge  to  a  neighboring  provision  of  the 
Act, prohibiting the registration of “immoral[ ] or scandal-
ous”  trademarks.  Ibid.  We  hold  that  this  provision  in-
fringes  the  First  Amendment  for  the  same  reason:  It  too 
disfavors certain ideas. 

I 

Respondent Erik Brunetti is an artist and entrepreneur 
who  founded  a  clothing  line  that  uses  the  trademark
FUCT.  According to Brunetti, the mark (which functions
as  the  clothing’s  brand  name)  is  pronounced  as  four  let-
ters, one after the other: F-U-C-T.  See Brief for Respond-