Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/16pdf/15-1293_1o13.pdf
Page Number: 20

16 

MATAL v. TAM 

Opinion of the Court 

strange city knows about legal title to the land and build-
ings he passes” (emphasis deleted)).

None  of  our  government  speech  cases  even  remotely 
supports  the  idea  that  registered  trademarks  are  govern-
ment  speech.  In  Johanns,  we  considered  advertisements 
promoting  the  sale  of  beef  products.    A  federal  statute 
called for the creation of a program of paid advertising “ ‘to 
advance the image and desirability of beef and beef prod-
ucts.’ ”  544  U. S.,  at  561  (quoting  7  U. S. C.  § 2902(13)). 
Congress and the Secretary of Agriculture provided guide-
lines for the content of the ads, Department of Agriculture 
officials  attended  the  meetings  at  which  the  content  of
specific ads was discussed, and the Secretary could edit or 
reject  any  proposed  ad.    544  U. S.,  at  561.   Noting  that 
“[t]he  message  set  out  in  the  beef  promotions  [was]  from
beginning  to  end  the  message  established  by  the  Federal 
Government,”  we  held  that  the  ads  were  government
speech.  Id., at 560.  The Government’s involvement in the 
creation  of  these  beef  ads  bears  no  resemblance  to  any-
thing that occurs when a trademark is registered. 
  Our decision in Summum is similarly far afield.  A small 
city  park  contained  15  monuments.    555  U. S.,  at  464. 
Eleven  had  been  donated  by  private  groups,  and  one  of 
these displayed the Ten Commandments.  Id., at 464–465. 
A  religious  group  claimed  that  the  city,  by  accepting  do-
nated monuments, had created a limited public forum for 
private speech and was therefore obligated to place in the 
park a monument expressing the group’s religious beliefs.

Holding  that  the  monuments  in  the  park  represented
government speech, we cited many factors.  Governments 
have used monuments to speak to the public since ancient 
times; parks have traditionally been selective in accepting
and displaying donated monuments; parks would be over-
run if they were obligated to accept all monuments offered
by private groups; “[p]ublic parks are often closely identi-
fied  in  the  public  mind  with  the  government  unit  that