Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/18-302_e29g.pdf
Page Number: 26.0

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

1 

Opinion of SOTOMAYOR, 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] 

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE BREYER joins,

concurring in part and dissenting in part. 

The  Court’s  decision  today  will  beget  unfortunate  re-
sults.  With  the  Lanham  Act’s  scandalous-marks  provi-
sion, 15 U. S. C. §1052(a), struck down as unconstitutional 
viewpoint  discrimination,  the  Government  will  have  no 
statutory basis to refuse (and thus no choice but to begin) 
registering marks containing the most vulgar, profane, or 
obscene words and images imaginable.

The  coming  rush  to  register  such  trademarks—and  the
Government’s  immediate  powerlessness  to  say  no—is
eminently  avoidable.  Rather  than  read  the  relevant  text 
as  the  majority  does,  it  is  equally  possible  to  read  that 
provision’s  bar  on  the  registration  of  “scandalous”  marks
to address only obscenity, vulgarity, and profanity.  Such a 
narrowing  construction  would  save  that  duly  enacted
legislative  text  by  rendering  it  a  reasonable,  viewpoint-
neutral  restriction  on  speech  that  is  permissible  in  the 
context  of  a  beneficial  governmental  initiative  like  the
trademark-registration  system.  I  would  apply  that  nar-
rowing  construction  to  the  term  “scandalous”  and  accord-
ingly reject petitioner Erik Brunetti’s facial challenge.