Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/18-302_e29g.pdf
Page Number: 27

2 

IANCU v. BRUNETTI 

Opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J. 

I 
Trademark  registration,  as  the  majority  notes,  is  not
required for using, owning, or suing others for infringing a
trademark.  Rather, the trademark-registration system is 
an ancillary system set up by the Government that confers
a small number of noncash benefits on trademark-holders 
who register their marks.  See ante, at 2. 

The Government need not provide this largely commer-
cial benefit at all.  Once the Government does provide the
benefit, however, it may not restrict access on the basis of 
the  viewpoint  expressed  by  the  relevant  mark.    See  ante, 
at  4–5.  For  that  reason,  the  Court  concluded  in  Matal  v. 
Tam, 582 U. S. ___ (2017), that §1052(a)’s provision direct-
ing the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to deny
registration to “disparag[ing]” trademarks was unconstitu-
tional.  This  case  centers  on  a  neighboring  set  of  re-
strictions:  §1052(a)’s  provision  barring  registration  of 
marks featuring “immoral . . . or scandalous matter.” 

The  majority  finds  viewpoint  discrimination  here  by
treating the terms “scandalous” and “immoral” as compris-
ing a unified standard that allows messages “aligned with 
conventional moral standards” but forbids messages “hos-
tile to” such standards.  See  ante, at 6.  While the major- 
ity’s interpretation of the statute is a reasonable one, it is
not the only reasonable one. 

A 

As  the  majority  notes,  there  are  dictionary  definitions 
for  both  “immoral”  and  “scandalous”  that  do  suggest  a
viewpoint-discriminatory meaning.  See ante, at 5–6.  And 
as for the word “immoral,” I agree with the majority that
there  is  no  tenable  way  to  read  it  that  would  ameliorate
the  problem.  The  word  clearly  connotes  a  preference  for
“rectitude and morality” over its opposite.  See ante, at 5. 

It  is  with  regard  to  the  word  “scandalous”  that  I  part
ways with the majority.  Unquestionably, “scandalous” can