Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-704_4246.pdf
Page Number: 43

Cite as:  602 U. S. ____ (2024) 

1 

SOTOMAYOR, J., concurring in judgment 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 22–704 
_________________ 

KATHERINE K. VIDAL, UNDER SECRETARY OF 
COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 
AND DIRECTOR, UNITED STATES PATENT 
AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, PETITIONER 
v. STEVE ELSTER 

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

[June 13, 2024] 

JUSTICE  SOTOMAYOR,  with  whom  JUSTICE  KAGAN  and 

JUSTICE JACKSON join, concurring in the judgment. 

This case involves a free-speech challenge to a viewpoint-
neutral,  content-based  condition  on  trademark  registra-
tion.  In deciding how to evaluate this kind of challenge, the 
Court faces two options: Either look only to the history and 
tradition of the condition, or look to trademark law and set-
tled First  Amendment precedent.   The first option, which
asks whether the history of a particular trademark regis-
tration bar plays well with the First Amendment, leads this
Court into uncharted territory that neither party requests.
The other guides it through well-trodden terrain.  I would 
follow the well-trodden path.

In assessing the constitutionality of the names clause and 
other  trademark  registration  provisions,  I  would  rely  on 
this  Court’s  tried-and-tested  First Amendment  precedent.
This Court has held in a variety of contexts that withhold-
ing  benefits  for  content-based,  viewpoint-neutral  reasons 
does not violate the Free Speech Clause when the applied 
criteria are reasonable and the scheme is necessarily con-
tent based.  That is the situation here.  Content discrimina-
tion is an inescapable feature of the trademark system, and