Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-704_4246.pdf
Page Number: 55

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

13 

SOTOMAYOR, J., concurring in judgment 

Daniel’s, 599 U. S., at 146; 1 J. McCarthy, Trademarks and 
Unfair  Competition  §3:1  (5th  ed.  2023).    More  generally,
this kind of reasonableness inquiry appears in every limited 
public (or nonpublic) forum case.  Far from being subjective
and  unworkable,  this kind  of  test  goes  to  the  very  core  of
what judges and lawyers do every day.  When contrasted to 
their preferred history-driven approach, the criticism of the 
reasonableness inquiry is even more unpersuasive.  As dis-
cussed above, the history-and-tradition approach is not just
flawed as a matter of first principles, but also highly inde-
terminate  and  unfamiliar  to  judges  and  litigants  in  this
area of the law.  See supra, at 3–5.  How much history is
enough to clear the historical analogue bar the five-Justice 
majority set up?  What does that look like in this context? 
When it comes to subjectivity, their preferred approach em-
powers judges to pick their friends in a crowded party.  See 
supra, at 4.  When faced with the two options, I choose the 
test that is rooted in this Court’s First Amendment doctrine 
and precedent, is attuned to what judges and lawyers are 
properly  trained  to  do,  and  does  not  limit  Congress  from
dealing with modern-day conditions based on the foresight 
of yesterday’s generation. 

B 
“Content-based criteria for trademark registration do not 
abridge the right to free speech so long as they reasonably 
relate to the preservation of the markowner’s goodwill and 
the prevention of consumer confusion,” “goals” that a “par-
ticular restriction will serve . . . if it helps ensure that reg-
istered marks actually function as source identifiers.”  Ante, 
at  8  (opinion  of  BARRETT,  J.)  The  names  clause  easily 
passes this reasonableness test.  Source identification is, af-
ter all, at the heart of what the names clause does. 

Imagine someone who wants to manufacture and sell the 
best bats and catchers’ mitts in baseball.  Unsurprisingly,
that  person  wants  to  use  the  names  of  Derek  Jeter  and