Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-704_4246.pdf
Page Number: 24.0

20 

VIDAL v. ELSTER 

Opinion of THOMAS, J. 

analogue  may  require  a  different  approach.    Post,  at  15. 
But, we need not develop such a comprehensive theory to 
address the relatively simple case before us today.  See post, 
at 1 (KAVANAUGH, J., concurring in part).

We  conclude  that  the  names  clause  is  of  a  piece  with  a 
common-law  tradition  regarding  the  trademarking  of 
names.  We see no reason to disturb this longstanding tra-
dition, which supports the restriction of the use of another’s 
name in a trademark. 

III 
Our colleagues would address the names clause with two
analogies.  Neither is compelling in this case.  Under both 
analogies, the test would boil down to what a judge believes 
is  “reasonable  in  light  of  the  purpose”  of  trademark  law. 
Post, at 5 (opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J.); see post, at 7–8 (opin-
ion of BARRETT, J.).  But, no matter the approach taken, we
all agree that the names clause does not violate the First 
Amendment. 

JUSTICE  SOTOMAYOR  would  pull  “strands  of  precedent” 
together to conclude that heightened scrutiny does not ap-
ply  to  trademark  registration  because  it  is  a Government 
initiative or benefit.  Post, at 8.  This conclusion rests pri-
marily upon cases in which the Government provides a cash
subsidy or conditions the use of a public payroll to collect 
union  dues.   See  ibid.   But,  those  cases  “occupy  a  special
area  of  First  Amendment  case  law,  and  they  are  far  re-
moved  from  the  registration  of  trademarks.”    Tam,  582 
The  Government-
U. S.,  at  241  (plurality  opinion). 
benefit  cases  are  an  ill  fit  for  the  names  clause,  and  we 
would not graft this precedent, which JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR 
acknowledges  is  not  controlling,  onto  this  trademark  dis-
pute.  Post, at 8–9. 

JUSTICE BARRETT, echoed by JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, would 
import the test that we have used for a “limited public fo-