Official - Subject to Final Review 1 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 3 MICHELLE K. LEE, DIRECTOR, : 4 UNITED STATES PATENT : 5 AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, : 6 Petitioner : 7 v. : 8 SIMON SHIAO TAM, : 9 10 Respondent. No. 15-1293 : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 11 Washington, D.C. 12 Wednesday, January 18, 2017 13 14 The above-entitled matter came on for oral 15 argument before the Supreme Court of the United States 16 at 10:07 a.m. 17 APPEARANCES: 18 MALCOLM L. STEWART, ESQ., Deputy Solicitor General, 19 Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; on 20 behalf of the Petitioner. 21 22 JOHN C. CONNELL, ESQ., Haddonfield, N.J.; on behalf of the Respondent. 23 24 25 Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 2 1 C O N T E N T S 2 ORAL ARGUMENT OF 3 MALCOLM L. STEWART, ESQ. 4 PAGE On behalf of the Petitioner 5 ORAL ARGUMENT OF 6 JOHN C. CONNELL, ESQ. 7 On behalf of the Respondent 8 REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OF 9 MALCOLM L. STEWART, ESQ. 10 On behalf of the Petitioner 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Alderson Reporting Company 3 27 48 Official - Subject to Final Review 3 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (10:07 a.m.) CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: We'll hear argument first this morning in Case No. 15-1293, Lee v. Tam. Mr. Stewart. ORAL ARGUMENT OF MALCOLM L. STEWART ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER MR. STEWART: Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court: The statutory provision at issue in this 11 case, 15 U.S.C. 1052(a), prohibits the registration of 12 any mark that may disparage persons, institutions, 13 beliefs, or national symbols. 14 the PTO denied Respondent's application to register The 15 Slants as a service mark for his band. 16 did not limit Respondent's ability to use the mark in 17 commerce, or otherwise to engage in expression or debate 18 on any subject he wishes. 19 Based on that provision, The PTO's ruling Because Section 52(a)'s disparagement 20 provision places a reasonable limit on access to a 21 government program rather than a restriction on speech, 22 it does not violate the First Amendment. 23 JUSTICE KENNEDY: 24 25 Is copyright -- copyright a government program? MR. STEWART: I think we would say copyright Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 4 1 and copyright registration is a government program, but 2 it's historically been much more tied to First Amendment 3 values to the incentivization of free expression. 4 JUSTICE KENNEDY: But part of that, seems to 5 me, to ignore the fact that we have a culture in which 6 we have tee shirts and logos and rock bands and so forth 7 that are expressing a -- a point of view. 8 using the -- the market to express views. 9 MR. STEWART: 10 They are I mean, certainly -- JUSTICE KENNEDY: But I was -- disparagement 11 clearly wouldn't work with copyright, and -- but that's 12 a powerful, important government program. 13 14 MR. STEWART: Let me say two or three things about that. 15 First, there's no question that through 16 their music, The Slants are expressing views on social 17 and political issues. 18 to do that. 19 get intellectual property protection that way. 20 They have a First Amendment right They're able to copyright their songs and If Congress attempted to prohibit them, 21 either from having copyright protection or copyright 22 registration on their music, that would pose a much more 23 substantial First Amendment issue. 24 25 JUSTICE ALITO: issue. But -- Substantial First Amendment I was somewhat surprised that in your briefs you Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 5 1 couldn't bring yourself to say that the government could 2 not deny copyright protection to objectionable material. 3 Are you going to say that? 4 MR. STEWART: I -- I hate to give away any 5 hypothetical statute without hearing the justification, 6 but I'll come as close as I possibly can to say, yes, we 7 would give that away. 8 deny copyright protection on that ground. 9 It would be unconstitutional to But I -- I would also say, even in the 10 copyright context, we would distinguish between limits 11 on copyright protection and restrictions on speech. 12 instance, it's historically been the case, and it 13 remains the position of the copyright office, that a 14 person can't copyright new words or short phrases. 15 if a person comes up with something that is original, 16 that is pithy, that makes a point, if it's too short, 17 you can't get copyright protection. 18 For Even We would certainly defend the 19 constitutionality of that traditional limit on the scope 20 of copyrightable material, and if there were a First 21 Amendment challenge brought, we would argue that there's 22 a fundamental distinction between saying you can't 23 copyright a four-word phrase and saying you can't say 24 the four-word phrase, or you can't write it in print. 25 But there's -- Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 6 1 JUSTICE GINSBURG: There's a significant 2 difference between the copyright regime, you can't sue 3 for copyright infringement unless you register. 4 that so? 5 MR. STEWART: Isn't You have to have filed an 6 application to register in order to -- to pursue an 7 infringement suit. 8 believe it's 17 U.S.C. 411(a) indicates that if you 9 filed an application to register your copyright, even if And so the -- the statute -- I 10 that application has been denied, you can still bring 11 your copyright suit, and the register is entitled to be 12 heard on questions of copyrightability. 13 14 JUSTICE GINSBURG: There's no restriction on -- on the trademark. 15 MR. STEWART: That's correct. You can file 16 a suit under Section 1125(a) of Title 15 under -- under 17 the trademark laws either for infringement or of an 18 unregistered trademark or for unfair competition more 19 generally. 20 But -- but -CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Counsel, I'm -- I'm 21 concerned that your government program argument is -- is 22 circular. 23 mark because it's disparaging, and your answer is, well, 24 we run a program that doesn't include disparaging 25 trademarks, so that's why you're excluded. The claim is you're not registering on my Alderson Reporting Company It -- it Official - Subject to Final Review 7 1 doesn't seem to me to advance the argument very much. 2 MR. STEWART: Well, I think the 3 disparagement provision is only one of a number of 4 restrictions on copy -- I'm sorry, on trademark 5 registrability that really couldn't be placed on speech 6 itself. 7 descriptive, that are generic, marks as to which the -- 8 the applicant is not the true owner because somebody 9 else was previously using the mark in commerce, those For example, words -- marks that are merely 10 can't be registered either. 11 JUSTICE BREYER: Well, each of those -- and 12 I know there are several -- are related to the ultimate 13 purpose of a trademark, which is to identify the source 14 of the product. 15 statement. 16 So every trademark makes that Now, what is -- what purpose or objective of 17 trademark protection does this particular disparagement 18 provision help along or further? 19 the provision that says you can say something nice about 20 a minority group, but you can't say something bad about 21 them. 22 don't know all, but I know many of them, and I can 23 relate that. 24 25 And I'm thinking of With all the other -- I know the others -- I You relate this. MR. STEWART: I think Congress evidently concluded that disparaging trademarks would hinder Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 8 1 commercial development in the following way: 2 trademark in and of itself is simply a source 3 identifier. 4 JUSTICE BREYER: 5 MR. STEWART: A Right. Its function is to tell the 6 public from whom did the goods or services emanate. 7 is not expressive in its own right. 8 9 It Now, it is certainly true that many commercial actors will attempt to devise trademarks that 10 not only can identify them as the source, but that also 11 are intended to convey positive messages about their 12 products. 13 Lube or a B&B that's called Piney Vista. 14 mark is -- is sort of a dual-purpose communication. 15 both identifies the source and it serves as a kind of 16 miniature advertisement. 17 For example, if you see the -- the name Jiffy The -- the It There's always the danger, as some of the 18 amicus briefs on our side point out, that when a person 19 uses as his mark words that have other meanings in 20 common discourse, that it will distract the consumer 21 from the intended purpose of the trademark qua 22 trademark, which is to identify source, and basically 23 Congress says, as long as you are promoting your own 24 product, saying nice things about people, we'll put up 25 with that level of distraction. Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 9 1 JUSTICE GINSBURG: But suppose the -- the 2 application here had been for Slants Are Superior. 3 that's a complimentary term. 4 it outside the disparagement bar? 5 MR. STEWART: So Would that then be -- take I -- I think that under the 6 PTO's historical practice, probably not. 7 and I think the same thing would be true of other racial 8 epithets, terms that have long been used as slurs for a 9 particular minority group -- 10 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: 11 disparaging of everyone else? 12 well, superior to whom? 13 MR. STEWART: I believe -- Why isn't that Slants Are Superior, I -- I think the basis for the 14 PTO's practice, and they obviously don't have that -- 15 this -- that case, is that the term "Slants," in and of 16 itself, when used in relation to Asian-Americans -- 17 JUSTICE BREYER: I have it. Right. I want 18 to get the answer to my question because that is the one 19 question I have for you. 20 The only question I have for you is what 21 purpose related to trademarks objective does this serve? 22 And I want to be sure I have your answer. 23 so far was, it prevents the -- or it helps to prevent 24 the user of the product from being distracted from the 25 basic message, which is, I made this product. Alderson Reporting Company Your answer Official - Subject to Final Review 10 1 I take it that's your answer. And if that's 2 your answer, I will -- my follow-up question to that 3 would be, I can think probably, and with my law clerks, 4 perhaps 50,000 examples of instances where the space the 5 trademark provides is used for very distracting 6 messages, probably as much or more so than the one at 7 issue, or disparagement. 8 Congress have picking out this one, but letting all the 9 other distractions exist? 10 MR. STEWART: And what business does Well, I think what -- I think 11 what you've described as my first-line answer, and I 12 think the precise justification for different kinds 13 of -- for prohibiting registration of different kinds of 14 disparaging trademarks would depend to some extent on 15 who is being disparaged. 16 That is, in the -- JUSTICE BREYER: It's not disparaging; your 17 answer was distracting. 18 great things of 99 percent of all trademarks is they 19 don't just identify; boy, do they distract. 20 of advertising. 21 you didn't provide an answer to disparagement. 22 answer is why disparagement was they don't want 23 distraction from the message. 24 25 And -- and -- and one of the It's a form So if the answer is distracting, not -- MR. STEWART: You're They don't want -- they don't want distraction and they don't want particular type -- Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 11 1 types of distraction. 2 That is, when we're dealing -- JUSTICE BREYER: But that's where I have the 3 question. 4 of distraction, disparagement, and any purpose of a 5 trademark? What relation is there to a particular type 6 MR. STEWART: The -- the type -- the type of 7 distraction that may be caused by a disparaging 8 trademark will depend significantly on the precise type 9 of disparagement at issue. That is, in the case of 10 racial epithets, these words are known to cause harm, to 11 cause controversy. 12 they may be no more distracting than a positive message, 13 but Congress can determine this is the wrong kind of 14 distraction. They -- in some sense they may no -- 15 JUSTICE KAGAN: 16 MR. STEWART: Mr. Stewart, please. Another type would be a 17 competing soft drink manufacturer who wants to register 18 the trademark Coke Stinks, who wants to identify his own 19 product with a sentiment that is antithetical to one of 20 his competitors. 21 not to encourage that form of commerce. 22 to -- that -- that commercial actors will promote their 23 own products rather than disparage others. 24 under the First Amendment, we couldn't prevent that kind 25 of criticism, but we can decline to encourage it. Congress can determine we would prefer Alderson Reporting Company We can prefer Obviously, Official - Subject to Final Review 12 1 I'm sorry. 2 JUSTICE KAGAN: Assume government speech 3 itself is not involved. 4 government programs were subject to one extremely 5 important constraint, which is that they can't make 6 distinctions based on viewpoint. I always thought that 7 So why isn't this doing exactly that? 8 MR. STEWART: 9 Because it -- it precludes disparagement of all and it casts a wide net. 10 JUSTICE KAGAN: Yes. It -- Well, that's 11 absolutely true. 12 Democrats and Republicans alike, and so forth and so on, 13 but it makes a very important distinction, which is that 14 you can say good things about some person or group, but 15 you can't say bad things about some person or group. 16 It -- it precludes disparagement of So, for example, let's say that I wanted a 17 mark that expressed the idea that all politicians are 18 corrupt, or just that Democrats are corrupt. 19 way, it doesn't matter. 20 though I could get a mark saying that all politicians 21 are virtuous, or that all Democrats are virtuous. 22 Either way, it doesn't matter. 23 Either I couldn't get that mark, even You see the point. The point is that I can say good things 24 about something, but I can't say bad things about 25 something. And I would have thought that that was a Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 13 1 fairly classic case of viewpoint discrimination. 2 MR. STEWART: Well, as we pointed out in our 3 brief, laws like libel laws have -- have not 4 historically been treated as discriminating based on 5 viewpoint, even though they -- 6 JUSTICE KAGAN: Well, that's libelism, one 7 of our historically different, but very distinct 8 categories. 9 falls into a category of low value speech in the way And you don't make the claim that this 10 that libel laws and the way that defamation does or 11 fighting words or something like that. 12 looking to create a new category. 13 And you're not So in that case, it seems that the 14 viewpoint-based ban applies, and -- and this -- as I 15 said, I would be interested to hear your answer of why 16 the example that I stated is not viewpoint-based. 17 says you can say something bad about -- you can say 18 something good about somebody, but not something bad 19 about somebody or something. 20 MR. STEWART: It Well, certainly if you singled 21 out a particular category of people like political 22 officials and say -- said you can't say anything bad 23 about any of them, but you can say all the good things 24 you want, I think that would be viewpoint-based, because 25 it would be protected a discrete group of people. Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 14 1 2 Let me just give a -- a couple of other answers. 3 JUSTICE KAGAN: 4 JUSTICE KENNEDY: But why isn't that this? But -- but if you didn't 5 limit it, if you -- if you said you can't say anything 6 bad about anybody any time, that's okay? 7 MR. STEWART: Again, it's -- again, we're 8 not saying you can't say anything bad. 9 don't register your trademark if it is disparaging. 10 11 We're saying we Certainly -JUSTICE KAGAN: No, no, no. That's -- it -- 12 as I said, even in a government program, even assuming 13 that this is not just a classic speech restriction, 14 you're still subject to the constraint that you can't 15 discriminate on -- on the basis of viewpoint. 16 MR. STEWART: Well, in -- in Boos v. Barry, 17 it's -- it's not a majority opinion, but the Court there 18 was confronted with a law that made it illegal to -- I 19 believe it was post signs or engage in expressive 20 activity within 500 feet of a foreign embassy that was 21 intended to bring the foreign government into contempt 22 or disrepute. 23 sweeping too broadly, but at least the -- the plurality 24 would have held that it was not viewpoint-based because 25 it applied to all foreign embassies. And the -- the law was struck down as Alderson Reporting Company It didn't turn on Official - Subject to Final Review 15 1 2 the nature of the criticism. Another example I would give, and it's a 3 hypothetical example, but at least I have a strong 4 instinct as to how the -- the case should be decided. 5 Suppose at a public university the -- the school set 6 aside a particular room where students could post 7 messages on topics that were of interest or concern to 8 them as a way of promoting debate in a 9 nonconfrontational way, and the school said, just two 10 ground rules: 11 attacks on any other members of the school community. 12 No racial epithets and no personal It -- it would seem extraordinary to say 13 that's a viewpoint-based distinction that can't stand 14 because you're allowed to say complimentary things about 15 your fellow students -- 16 JUSTICE KENNEDY: So -- so the government is 17 the omnipresent schoolteacher? 18 you're saying? 19 MR. STEWART: 20 JUSTICE KENNEDY: 21 22 I mean, is that what No. The government's a schoolteacher? MR. STEWART: No. Again, that analysis 23 would apply only if the public school was setting aside 24 a room in its own facility. 25 attempted more broadly to restrict disparaging speech by Clearly, if the government Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 16 1 students or others rather than simply to limit the terms 2 under which a forum for communication could be made 3 available, that would involve entirely different 4 questions. 5 would have found the law unconstitutional even though 6 they found it not to be viewpoint-based. 7 That's why the plurality in Boos v. Barry CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: But one distinction 8 is the scope of the government program. 9 talking about a particular discussion venue at a -- at a If you're 10 public university, that's one thing. 11 about the entire trademark program, it seems to me to be 12 something else. 13 MR. STEWART: If you're talking Well, the -- the trademark 14 registration program and trademarks generally have not 15 historically served as vehicles for expression. 16 is, the Lanham Act defines trademark and service mark 17 purely by reference to their source identification 18 function. 19 That And I think it's -- to -- to get back to 20 copyright for just a second, I think it's at least 21 noteworthy that everyone would recognize that Mr. Tam is 22 not entitled to a copyright on The Slants. 23 copyright office doesn't register short phrases. 24 words is certainly short, especially when one of them -- 25 JUSTICE GINSBURG: The Two It's not because -- it's Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 17 1 not because of the content or the viewpoint expressed, 2 it's just it's a short phrase, and any short phrase 3 would be no good. 4 Slants because the PTO thinks that's a bad word. 5 it not count at all that everyone knows that The Slants 6 is using this term not at all to disparage, but simply 7 to describe? This is -- this is -- you can't say 8 MR. STEWART: 9 JUSTICE GINSBURG: 10 Does I think -It takes the sting out of the word. 11 MR. STEWART: Well, the trademark examining 12 attorney went through this in a lot of detail. 13 trademark examiner acknowledged that Mr. Tam's sincere 14 intent appeared to be to reclaim the word, to use it as 15 a symbol of Asian-American pride rather than to use it 16 as a slur. 17 form of Internet commentary to the effect that many 18 Asian-Americans, even those who recognized that this was 19 Mr. Tam's intent, still found the use of the word as a 20 band name offensive. 21 And the He -- he also found a lot of evidence in But the point I was trying to make about 22 copyright is, is not that copyright protection would be 23 denied on the ground of disparagement. 24 would be denied because it's a short phrase and not even 25 an original phrase. You're right, it But copyright is kind of the branch Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 18 1 of intellectual property law that is specifically 2 intended to foster free expression on matters of 3 cultural and political, among other, significance. 4 5 JUSTICE ALITO: Do you deny that trademarks are used for expressive purposes? 6 MR. STEWART: I don't deny that trademarks 7 are used for expressive purposes. 8 earlier, I think many commercial actors will pick a mark 9 that will not only serve as a source identifier, but 10 that will cast their products in an attractive light 11 and/or that will communicate a message on some other 12 topic. 13 particular trademarks should be registered, Congress is 14 entitled to focus exclusively on the source 15 identification aspect. As I was saying My -- my only point is in deciding whether 16 JUSTICE ALITO: I -- I wonder if you are not 17 stretching this, the -- the concept of a government 18 program, past the breaking point. 19 provides lots of services to the general public. 20 don't think you would say that those fall within the 21 government program line of cases that you're talking 22 about, like providing police protection to the general 23 public or providing fire protection to the general 24 public. 25 programs. The government And I Those cost money and those are government Can the government say, well, we're going to Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 19 1 provide protection for some groups, but not for other 2 groups? 3 MR. STEWART: No. I think those would raise 4 serious -- I mean, depending on the nature of the -- the 5 distinction -- equal protection problems, potential -- 6 JUSTICE KAGAN: There are potential -- there 7 are potential First Amendment problems, too, if the 8 nature of the distinction was based on the person's 9 speech; isn't that right? 10 11 MR. STEWART: Certainly. I mean, clearly, if it was based on viewpoint and clearly I would say -- 12 JUSTICE KAGAN: So absolutely clearly if it 13 was based on viewpoint. 14 want to interrupt your answer to Justice Alito, if -- 15 but I want to get back to -- because I don't really 16 understand the answer that you gave me before. 17 a government regulation that distinguished between 18 saying politicians are good and virtuous and politicians 19 are corrupt would clearly be viewpoint-based; is that 20 right? And -- and so I guess I don't 21 MR. STEWART: 22 JUSTICE KAGAN: You said Right. So -- and similarly, if you 23 said that the flag is a wonderful emblem, this -- this 24 applies to national symbols -- 25 MR. STEWART: Uh-huh. Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 20 1 JUSTICE KAGAN: -- but you could say that 2 the flag is a wonderful emblem, but you can't say that 3 the flag is a terrible emblem. 4 MR. STEWART: 5 JUSTICE KAGAN: 6 That would be viewpoint-based. 7 MR. STEWART: 8 JUSTICE KAGAN: 9 I -- Well -I mean, that's what this -- this regulation does. 10 MR. STEWART: 11 JUSTICE KAGAN: If you're talk -It says you can say one of 12 those things, but you can't say the other and get 13 trademark. 14 MR. STEWART: But it -- it sweeps with a 15 broad brush -- brush. 16 viewpoint-based discrimination has historically been the 17 most disfavored type of regulation from a First 18 Amendment perspective is that it creates the danger that 19 the government is attempting to suppress disfavored 20 messages. 21 Trademark Trial and Appeal Board decision from 1969 that 22 declined to register a proposed trademark that was 23 essentially the Soviet hammer and sickle with a slash 24 through it. 25 that it disparaged the national symbol of the Soviet And I think the reason that I mean, there was a -- there's a TTAB, a And registration was denied on the ground Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 21 1 Union. 2 Union was not inconsistent with United States policy in 3 1969. 4 trademark registration as an attempt to suppress a 5 disfavored viewpoint. 6 of my defense of the statute is it casts -- it sweeps 7 with such a broad brush -- 8 JUSTICE KAGAN: 9 10 Now, obviously, hostility towards the Soviet No one would have perceived the denial of And the point of the -- the point But that's like saying it does so much viewpoint-based discrimination that it becomes all right. 11 MR. STEWART: But it -- it does so -- I 12 mean, it -- it imposes this restriction only within the 13 confines of a government program. 14 JUSTICE KAGAN: And -- Yes, yes. And -- and I'm 15 willing to give you that. 16 again, assuming it's not government speech itself, even 17 government programs are subject to this constraint, 18 which is that you can't distinguish based on the 19 viewpoint of a speaker. 20 MR. STEWART: But even government programs, Well, part -- part of this 21 government program is government speech. 22 me just describe the two types of basic services that 23 the PTO performs in the course of administering the -- 24 the program. 25 And let -- let First, when an application is filed, the Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 22 1 examining attorney and potentially the -- the Trademark 2 Trial and Appeal Board will go through it to see whether 3 the applicant satisfies the statutory prerequisites to 4 registration. 5 essential to having a valid trademark. 6 prerequisites to registration overlap with the 7 prerequisites to having a valid trademark. 8 the examining attorney decides, is this merely 9 descriptive, is it generic, does it serve as a mark that And some of those, like 1052(a), are not But many of the And so when 10 consumers will associate with the -- the product in 11 commerce, is this person the true owner of the mark, the 12 examining attorney is deciding the same sorts of 13 questions that could arise in an infringement suit if 14 the applicant ever filed one. 15 JUSTICE GINSBURG: 16 That's another one. 17 just like disparaged. 18 the mark; right? 19 And therefore -What about scandalous? Scandalous or immoral. Those are They block you from registering MR. STEWART: They do block you from 20 registering the mark, not -- not from filing an 21 infringement suit or alleging unfair competition. 22 23 24 25 JUSTICE GINSBURG: Because that's the same thing. MR. STEWART: That's -- that's the -- that's the same thing as disparagement. I -- I was just saying Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 23 1 many of the other statutory prerequisites do overlap 2 with the prerequisites to having a valid trademark. 3 And so if the examining attorney approves 4 the application, he is giving the -- the applicant at 5 least some comfort that he can continue to use the mark 6 in commerce with a degree of confidence that if somebody 7 else infringes the mark, he will be able to satisfy 8 the -- the prerequisites. 9 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Running the Federal 10 courts is a government program. 11 courts -- when it comes to trademarks, the courts are 12 not open for actions to enforce infringement of a 13 disparaging trademark? 14 MR. STEWART: Can you say that the If Congress had taken to its 15 furthest possible step the desire to disassociate the 16 Federal government from the enforcement of -- or from 17 these marks -- 18 19 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: So that was how the hypothetical was framed -- 20 MR. STEWART: 21 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Right. -- the furthest 22 possible step. 23 same analysis you do simply with the -- as in this case? 24 How far can they go in defining the government program? 25 But it's the same -- do you apply the MR. STEWART: I think we would typically Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 24 1 think of the -- the PTO as exercise of discretionary 2 authority and as -- the exercise of discretionary 3 authority by an executive branch agency as -- as 4 different from the neutral enforcement of the law by -- 5 by the courts. 6 Obviously -- JUSTICE KENNEDY: If it's a government 7 program, can you do anything you want with speech? 8 Or what -- what are -- what are the restrictions that we 9 can -- is it intermediate? 10 You don't argue that this statute meets strict scrutiny. 11 MR. STEWART: 12 JUSTICE KENNEDY: 13 MR. STEWART: I think -- I think -I take it you don't. No. I think the basic test 14 would be is it reasonably relate -- related to the 15 objectives of the government program, and in cases of 16 viewpoint discrimination, in cases where the -- the 17 program raises the concern that the government is 18 attempting to promote disfavored messages and suppress 19 disfavored messages, the -- the program would be 20 presumptively unconstitutional. 21 The second form of service that the PTO 22 provides in the course of administering the program is 23 that if it decides the trademark should be registered, 24 it publishes the trademark on the Federal Register. 25 publication has a -- is significant in a variety of Alderson Reporting Company And Official - Subject to Final Review 25 1 ways. 2 publication of the trademark on the Federal Register 3 reduces the likelihood that any infringement will occur, 4 because it provides notice to potential competitors in 5 commerce that the PTO has approved this mark. 6 give them an incentive to choose marks that are not 7 confusingly similar. 8 9 First, outside the -- the context of legal suits, JUSTICE GINSBURG: It will And just as importantly, because your time is running, the questions have 10 concentrated on viewpoint discrimination, but there's 11 also a large concern with vagueness here, and the list 12 that we have of things that were trademarked and things 13 that weren't. 14 "Heb," and that was okay in one application and it was 15 not okay in another. 16 Take, for example, one had the word MR. STEWART: First, if -- if the Court 17 accepts our basic theory that this should be judged by 18 the standards that typically apply to government 19 benefits under a government program, although the 20 statute doesn't draw an entirely bright line, it's 21 sufficiently clear. 22 instance, the criteria for awarding any A grants that 23 were at issue in Finley to the effect that the -- the 24 grant givers should take account of the diverse views 25 and -- and beliefs of the American public. The Court has approved, for Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 26 1 The trademark -- the PTO receives 300,000 2 trademark applications every year, so it's not 3 surprising that there is some potential inconsistency. 4 5 And the other thing I would -- the other two things I would say are, first -- 6 7 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: say it's not clear enough for them to get it right? 8 9 10 11 Isn't it another way to MR. STEWART: rule. It -- it's not a bright-line I would say two things -- two further things before I sit down. The first is that I think a lot of the 12 examples that the PTO has had trouble with and where it 13 may -- there may be an appearance in, perhaps, the fact 14 of inconsistent decisions, are instances where people 15 are deliberately using terms that have historically been 16 insulting, but with the intent to be edgy, provocative, 17 to reclaim the slur. 18 when people self-consciously use words in a way other 19 than they have traditionally been used, it's not 20 surprising that -- that sometimes they're -- they're 21 misunderstood. 22 This is entirely legitimate, but The second thing I'd say is the examples 23 that the other side gives are -- raise the concern that 24 the PTO might have approved some trademarks that it 25 shouldn't have approved, but they really haven't Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 27 1 identified any examples of marks that were rejected as 2 disparaging, even though no reasonable person could view 3 them as such. 4 5 If I may, I'd like to reserve the balance of my time. 6 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: 7 Mr. Connell. 8 ORAL ARGUMENT OF JOHN C. CONNELL 9 ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT 10 11 MR. CONNELL: Thank you, Counsel. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court: 12 If our client, Mr. Simon Tam, had sought to 13 register the mark of his band as The Proud Asians, we 14 would not be here today. 15 Instead he sought to register The Slants. 16 JUSTICE KENNEDY: But he did not do that. Suppose we had this 17 hypothetical case. 18 these, other than the band are non-Asians, they use 19 makeup to exaggerate slanted eyes, and they make fun of 20 Asians. 21 statute, decline to register that as a trademark in your 22 view? The facts are largely parallel to Could the government, under a properly-drawn 23 MR. CONNELL: 24 JUSTICE KENNEDY: 25 They could not. The First Amendment protects absolutely outrageous speech insofar as Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 28 1 trademarks are concerned. 2 MR. CONNELL: 3 JUSTICE KENNEDY: 4 MR. CONNELL: Well, we take that position because -- 7 (Laughter.) 8 MR. CONNELL: 9 I think you have to take that position. 5 6 That is correct. -- because marks constitute both commercial speech and noncommercial speech, and the 10 disparagement clause specifically targets the 11 noncommercial speech and denies registration to marks 12 that only express negative views. 13 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: 14 JUSTICE KENNEDY: But I have -But in your view, the 15 Congress could not draw a statute, even different to 16 this, to make the distinction that the hypotheticals 17 points out, and the Congress, in your view, could draw 18 no statute denying trademark protection in the 19 hypothetical case. 20 MR. CONNELL: I cannot think of a 21 circumstance under which that could occur. 22 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Then I have a question 23 for you. 24 one is stopping your client from calling itself The 25 Slants. This is a bit different than most cases. No one is stopping them from advertising Alderson Reporting Company No Official - Subject to Final Review 29 1 themselves that way, or signing contracts that way, or 2 engaging in any activity, except that stopping someone 3 else from using the same trademark. 4 could do. 5 to sue under the Lanham Act's entitlement for the 6 confusion of the public in the use of any kind of 7 registered or unregistered mark. 8 themselves Slants, they would be subject to deceptive 9 advertisements because they wouldn't be this Slants. 10 But even that they Because you don't need a registered trademark If another band called So there is a big difference. You are 11 asking the government to endorse your name to the extent 12 of protecting it in a way that it chooses not to. 13 it -- there is a reason why the argument's appealing. 14 And why shouldn't we consider it in those ways when your 15 speech is not being burdened in any traditional way? 16 MR. CONNELL: So The registration program, the 17 regulatory system of trademark registration, is widely 18 available to a broad number of mark holders who seek the 19 legal protections of registration. 20 In this case, the government has used the 21 disparagement clause to selectively deny those legal 22 benefits to a mark holder expressing negative views that 23 the government favors, as opposed to mark holders who 24 received those benefits because they express neutral or 25 positive views that the government does favor. Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 30 1 2 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: question. It doesn't answer my You can still use your name. 3 MR. CONNELL: 4 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: 5 MR. CONNELL: But -Why is it a burden? It -- it is a -- it is a 6 burden because our client is denied the benefits of 7 legal protections that are necessary for him to compete 8 in the marketplace with another band. 9 reason for the denial of those benefits is the burden on 10 his noncommercial speech contained in the mark. 11 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: 12 MR. CONNELL: 13 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: 14 MR. CONNELL: 15 16 And the only He can still sue. He can still -He can still compete. He can still compete, but he can't -JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: He's just not getting as 17 much as he would like, but he's not stopped from doing 18 what he's doing. 19 MR. CONNELL: He could still -- his only 20 resort at that point would be to seek the protection 21 of -- of -- or to assert his right to exclusive use of 22 the mark under Section 43, or State trademark law, or 23 common law, none of which have the extensive and 24 substantial benefits that this Court has recognized 25 under trademark registration. Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 31 1 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: It seems to me -- I 2 mean, does your argument depend upon the breadth of the 3 government program? 4 program putting on a -- a festival or a lecture series. 5 We only want pro-Shakespeare presentations. 6 celebrating Shakespeare. 7 Shakespeare, you can't participate. Let's say you had a government It's about And if you disparage 8 Is there anything wrong with that? 9 MR. CONNELL: I -- I don't believe there is 10 in that -- in that limited forum, that that -- that 11 would make a difference. 12 This is a widely available program that's made -- that 13 all comers can -- can utilize. 14 But this is not that case. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: 15 not. 16 utilize it. Well, but no, it's If you have a disparaging trademark, you can't 17 MR. CONNELL: Except again, that targets the 18 noncommercial aspect of speech, which has nothing to do 19 with the commercial objectives of the Lanham Act. 20 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Well, I guess I 21 don't understand yet your distinction why the 22 only-celebrating-Shakespeare program is -- is okay, but 23 the trademark one is not. 24 Shakespeare. 25 anybody in the trademark context. You can't disparage You can't have disparaging marks about Alderson Reporting Company Is it just the Official - Subject to Final Review 32 1 comprehensive nature of the government program? 2 MR. CONNELL: 3 JUSTICE KAGAN: 4 JUSTICE BREYER: 5 JUSTICE KAGAN: 6 JUSTICE BREYER: 7 JUSTICE KAGAN: In -- in this case it is. But why does that -Why does that --- matter? Yeah. I mean, maybe the government 8 just decides we want to celebrate everything. 9 to be relentlessly positive. 10 (Laughter.) 11 MR. CONNELL: We want And Justice Kagan, that goes 12 back to your point before, that that would -- would 13 discriminate against any negative viewpoints and only 14 arm one side of the debate. 15 JUSTICE BREYER: It isn't quite like that. 16 After all, as Justice Sotomayor pointed out, this is 17 more like a single bulletin board on the train station. 18 The train station which has a thousand bulletin boards. 19 People can say whatever they want. 20 board, one out of a thousand, is reserved today for 21 people who want to say nice things about Shakespeare. 22 This is not a general expression program. But this bulletin 23 This is a program that has one objective. The objective 24 is to identify the source of the product. It stops 25 nobody from saying anything. All it says is when you're Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 33 1 trying to fulfill our objective, which is identify the 2 source of your product, if you want, put a little circle 3 with an R in it and write down beneath in tiny letters, 4 Mr. and Mrs. Smith. 5 circle, not the thing that says the insulting thing 6 about somebody else. 7 Shakespeare celebration board out of a million. 8 say 10 million to make the point stronger. 9 That's -- that -- that's where you can't express Anything you want. See? But in that Very much like one Let me Do you see? 10 yourself, so -- and then I said to them, well, why do 11 you do that? 12 purpose of a -- of a trademark is to identify a source. 13 It's not to get people into extraneous arguments. 14 what this will do is it will get people into extraneous 15 arguments, losing or diluting the force of a program 16 that seeks to use a trademark to identify a source. 17 And they said because, you know, the And Now, that's what I got out of my answer to 18 the last question on the other side, and I would like to 19 know what you think. 20 MR. CONNELL: Actually, I think the -- the 21 government's position is -- 22 JUSTICE BREYER: 23 position is. 24 to the question I'm asking. 25 I don't care what their I want to know what you think in respect MR. CONNELL: Well, I -- I think what the Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 34 1 government is trying to do here is simply encourage 2 commercial actors to conduct business in such a way as 3 to not insult customers. 4 JUSTICE BREYER: Well, not -- not conduct 5 business. 6 have 50,000 insults on every physical item that you put 7 out. 8 mark or a form of words, it is designed to say one 9 thing -- I'm repeating myself -- I am the source of the They can insult customers. Boy, you could All you cannot do is when it comes to a little 10 product. 11 letters, tiny letters, no letter, whatever. 12 you have to stick to business, and if you're going to go 13 beyond business, don't use insults. 14 And you can do that in little letters, big But there Do you believe that they can stop trademarks 15 from saying -- this is the trademark you can't use -- 16 Joe Jones is a jerk? 17 MR. CONNELL: 18 JUSTICE BREYER: 19 They could not stop that. They could not stop that. They can't -- can they say Smith's beer is poison? 20 MR. CONNELL: 21 JUSTICE BREYER: They could not. Oh, my goodness. I mean, 22 there are laws all over the place that stop you from 23 saying that a competitor is -- has bad products. 24 called product disparagement. 25 the place that stop you from saying Joe Jones is a jerk It's There are laws all over Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 35 1 or something more specific. 2 or slander laws. 3 couldn't do that? 4 They're called libel laws But you're saying the government MR. CONNELL: The government cannot burden 5 the noncommercial aspect of the mark, and that's what 6 they would be doing in that case. 7 JUSTICE GINSBURG: Now, that's saying you 8 cannot trademark a slogan that has one of George 9 Carlin's seven day -- dirty words in it. 10 (Laughter.) 11 JUSTICE GINSBURG: 12 If you were to use one of those seven words, we won't register your trademark. 13 MR. CONNELL: I think that is a burden on 14 speech. 15 Cohen v. California was -- was trademarked, there's no 16 question that there would be a -- a burden on the 17 noncommercial aspect of that mark. In fact, I think if the phrase that was used in 18 JUSTICE GINSBURG: 19 JUSTICE KAGAN: 20 JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, but -- Can I --- due to this Court's 21 specific decision, which said it was okay to ban those 22 words from the airwaves -- 23 MR. CONNELL: 24 JUSTICE GINSBURG: 25 Well, I -But then -- now, this -- this is not, yeah, you can have trademark protection, Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 36 1 but we're not going to let you get the extra benefits of 2 registration. 3 air, and this Court upheld it. 4 It's you can't use those words on the MR. CONNELL: Yeah. Pacifica actually 5 simply was limited to time, place, and manner 6 restrictions. 7 not banning the use of those words. 8 Pacifica did say that notwithstanding the content 9 restrictions imposed on -- on -- on those words, the The Court expressly said that they were And in addition, 10 fact of the matter was that if the -- the restrictions 11 were motivated by a negative view of the ideological or 12 political message being conveyed, that would be 13 unconstitutional. 14 JUSTICE BREYER: But time, place, or manner, 15 there is time, place, or manner. 16 these words anywhere at any time in your performance. 17 Just don't use them as the registered source of the 18 message, I am the owner of the -- of the -- of the band. 19 Time, place, and manner. 20 where you can say what you want, including this. 21 22 23 In fact, you can use You have the entire universe So why is this somehow not a restriction on time, place, and manner if the others were? MR. CONNELL: Because, again, I come back to 24 the fact that this is a burden on the noncommercial 25 aspect of the mark. Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 37 1 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: 2 JUSTICE BREYER: 3 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: 4 Excuse me. How do you -Let's go back to, if we can, the earlier part of Justice Breyer's question. 5 1052 has two components. You can't 6 disparage or falsely suggest a connection with a person 7 institution. 8 second part of 1052 falsely suggests the connection is 9 unconstitutional as well? 10 11 Are you challenging or saying that the MR. CONNELL: That's not the question before this Court. 12 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: I know. But your 13 argument earlier was that if someone slanders or libels 14 an individual by saying -- Trump before he was a public 15 figure -- Trump is a thief and that becomes their 16 trademark, that even if they go to court and prove that 17 that's a libel or a slander, that trademark would still 18 exist and would be capable of use because otherwise 19 canceling it would be an abridgement of the First 20 Amendment? 21 MR. CONNELL: 22 JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: 23 JUSTICE ALITO: I believe that's correct. That makes no sense. Mr. Connell, don't you think 24 that Congress could deny a trademark registration for 25 something that fit within the narrow, historically Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 38 1 recognized category of libel and slander which have 2 never been regarded as having First Amendment 3 protection? 4 MR. CONNELL: I -- I think the outer limit 5 of the protection here are the categories of 6 historically prescribed speech. 7 threats, it would include fraud, things such as that. 8 That's not the case, obviously, with the mark that we're 9 using here. 10 JUSTICE KAGAN: That would include Well, one of the things, 11 Mr. Connell, that troubles me about this case is that 12 it's not quite as simple as just saying, well, here's a 13 government program and the government is discriminating 14 on the basis of viewpoint, because there are aspects of 15 this program that seem like government speech itself, 16 maybe not quite that, but something approaching it, 17 which is the program says that anything that's 18 registered, the government publishes in its own 19 publication. 20 again, in its own publication. 21 geared in such a way that individual marks that are 22 registered end up being -- I doubt anybody would ascribe 23 them to the government, but the government republishes 24 them, communicates them and so forth. 25 aspect of the program give the government greater leeway The government sends to foreign countries, So the whole program is Alderson Reporting Company And doesn't that Official - Subject to Final Review 39 1 here than it would in a typical program in which no 2 government speech itself is involved? 3 MR. CONNELL: It does not. The register 4 simply serves as a recordation of the marks that the 5 government has approved according to the statutory 6 criteria. 7 registration, patent registration, marriage license 8 registration, car registrations, any other kind of 9 typical government registrations that are simply This is in no way different than copy 10 ministerial. The government is not speaking. 11 its message. The control over the creation and design 12 of the mark is retained at all times by the owner. 13 There is no history here of the government using marks 14 to speak through private mark holders, and there's no 15 association with -- between the government and -- and 16 the mark itself. 17 JUSTICE GINSBURG: It's not But doesn't the 18 government have some interest in disassociating itself 19 from racial ethnic slur -- slurs? 20 about the license -- Texas license, vanity license 21 plate, and they said we won't do one with the 22 Confederate flag. 23 MR. CONNELL: Things like, what That was specifically a 24 government speech case. 25 is not a government ID, issued on government property, That's not our case here. Alderson Reporting Company This Official - Subject to Final Review 40 1 controlled by the government as to design and content 2 and so on. 3 It's -- in fact, it's exactly the opposite. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: You've said -- 4 you've said several times that the problem is that the 5 government is burdening noncommercial -- the 6 noncommercial aspects of the trademark, but it seems to 7 me that that's an awfully blurry line. 8 trademarks promote the commercial aspect, in fact, by 9 disparaging other groups. A lot of these So they figure that it's a 10 way to promote sales. 11 between the commercial aspect of the trademark and the 12 noncommercial aspect? 13 How do you tell the difference MR. CONNELL: The commercial aspect is that 14 part of the mark that simply identifies the source of 15 the good or service in question. 16 Slants, there's another component, that being the 17 noncommercial, which communicates the political and 18 social message of Asian pride. 19 In the case of The This is akin to Justice Breyer before 20 talking about the in -- inherit advertisement that can 21 take place. 22 people associate the music with the band name and the 23 band name with the music that they perform. 24 25 Bands don't exist without names, and -- and So that -- that is where the noncommercial aspect of -- of the speech comes in. Alderson Reporting Company And to the extent Official - Subject to Final Review 41 1 that the government is burdening it by denying 2 registration because they believe that it -- it conveys 3 a negative view, that's unconstitutional. 4 JUSTICE KENNEDY: You want us to say that 5 trademark law is just like a public park -- the public 6 park, a public forum, the classic example of where you 7 can say anything you want. 8 trademarks just like we treat speech in a public park. 9 Thank you very much. 10 11 We treat this -- we treat Good-bye. That's it. That's your argument. MR. CONNELL: It -- it is my argument. I 12 think the limitation on that, as I said before, are the 13 categories of historically prescribable speech. 14 JUSTICE KAGAN: Well, Mr. Connell, this 15 can't be right, because think of all the other things, 16 the other -- I mean, I'll call them content distinctions 17 because they are -- that trademark law just makes. 18 mean, Section 2 prohibits the registration of any mark 19 that's falsely suggestive of a connection with persons 20 likely to cause confusion, descriptive, misdescriptive, 21 functional, a geographic indication for wine or spirits, 22 government insignia, a living person's name, portrait, 23 or signature. 24 distinctions in a -- in a -- in a public park, and yet, 25 of course, you can make them in trademark law, can't I You couldn't make any of those Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 42 1 2 you? MR. CONNELL: All of those other 3 distinctions are viewpoint-neutral and advance the 4 commercial objectives of the Lanham Act in terms of 5 reducing consumer confusion. 6 JUSTICE KAGAN: Well, these might be 7 viewpoint-neutral, but they're certainly not 8 content-neutral, and yet we would -- I mean, I think 9 that a challenge to many of these would fall flat. 10 MR. CONNELL: 11 JUSTICE KAGAN: On what basis? Because -- like, how is 12 trademark law supposed to function unless it can make 13 these kinds of distinctions? 14 15 MR. CONNELL: I'm suggesting that those -- those sections would survive. 16 JUSTICE KAGAN: 17 MR. CONNELL: 18 JUSTICE KAGAN: Well -Section B --- okay. If those would 19 survive, then this is not a public park, because those 20 would not survive in a public park. 21 MR. CONNELL: 22 JUSTICE KAGAN: Agreed. There's something different 23 here, in other words, that this is coming up in the 24 context of a government program -- 25 MR. CONNELL: Well -- Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 43 1 JUSTICE KAGAN: -- which provides certain 2 benefits that the government doesn't have to provide at 3 all. 4 MR. CONNELL: The -- the point here is 5 that the -- the government program, at least the goals 6 of the Lanham Act, are to reduce consumer confusion, and 7 that is a legitimate interest that the government has. 8 And these -- these factors under 1052 advance that -- 9 that purpose. 10 JUSTICE ALITO: I want to come back to 11 the -- the Chief Justice's question. 12 difficulty separating the expressive from the commercial 13 aspect of a trademark. 14 Let me give you an example. I think that Nike's phrase "Just Do It" is a 15 registered trademark. 16 that expressive? 17 I really have Now, is that commercial or is MR. CONNELL: It is both. The -- the two 18 are intertwined. 19 have the source identifier that is inextricably 20 intertwined with the message that the mark is -- is 21 conveying about the source -- or about the goods and 22 services identified. 23 The -- just like with The Slants. JUSTICE ALITO: You Well, if they're 24 inexplicably intertwined, then I -- I don't understand 25 how we can separate them and apply to the expressive Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 44 1 part a more rigorous test than we would apply to the 2 commercial part. 3 4 MR. CONNELL: I'm not sure I understand your question. 5 JUSTICE ALITO: All right. Do you think 6 that viewpoint discrimination is always prohibited in 7 commercial speech? 8 say -- and maybe it already has said -- that a 9 manufacturer of cigarettes could not place on a package For example, could the government 10 of cigarettes "Great for your health. 11 surgeon general"? 12 MR. CONNELL: Don't believe the Viewpoint discrimination is 13 prohibited in commercial speech, no question, under the 14 Sorrell case. 15 JUSTICE BREYER: Well, it's back to really 16 the Chief Justice's question. 17 but I think -- except that I think you do have something 18 of an answer that you haven't fully expressed. 19 Look. I -- I wouldn't ask it, We're creating, through government, a 20 form of a property right, a certain form. 21 trademark. 22 certain kind of physical property right that certain 23 people could dedicate a small part of their houses or 24 land to Peaceful Grove. 25 write messages, but peaceful messages. That's a It's as if through government we created a And in Peaceful Grove, you Alderson Reporting Company And above all, Official - Subject to Final Review 45 1 you don't write messages that will provoke others to 2 violence or bad feelings. 3 Okay? Anything wrong with that? I can't think of 4 anything wrong with that. 5 where they can express hostile feelings. 6 this tiny place, one-quarter of an acre, that you 7 yourself have chosen to take advantage of that you can't 8 because it will destroy the purpose. 9 the purpose of Peaceful Grove. 10 There are thousands of places It's just in It will destroy That's why I asked my question. 11 To what extent does interfering with 12 viewpoints here serve a trademark-related purpose? 13 we can see how in Peaceful Grove or in Shakespeare, the 14 messages that we were talking about did harm the 15 government purpose. 16 disparaging messages get in the way of the objective of 17 this program, which is to identify the source. 18 that, I think, is what I heard. 19 you to think about and respond to. 20 As And here, they're saying similarly, MR. CONNELL: Now, That's what I'd like Disparaging messages in 21 trademark do not interfere with the source. 22 control the -- the other component of -- of the message. 23 The -- The Slants is -- is the band. 24 identified. 25 of the service, the music in question, is -- is served They simply It's clearly So the -- the identification of the source Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 46 1 by the mark. 2 other message. 3 What the government objects to is the It's the other message. JUSTICE BREYER: Well, I understand that. 4 But now your answer -- okay, I've got your answer. 5 now your other answers were worrying me, because what's 6 worrying me is I accept what you just said -- suppose I 7 did; am I suddenly saying no Peaceful Grove, no 8 Shakespeare celebration, no normal restrictions on 9 normal restrictions, no function -- you know, it's And 10 functional, can't have functional things in a trademark, 11 da, da, da, all the ones we read. 12 answer just -- that you just gave, have I suddenly 13 opened the door to striking down all those things? 14 15 MR. CONNELL: No. If I buy into your I don't think so, because -- 16 JUSTICE BREYER: 17 MR. CONNELL: Well, why not? Because the purpose, as -- as 18 you said, Your Honor, of Peaceful Grove was to have a 19 place of seclusion, of solitude, of -- of calm. 20 completely different than the trademark regime, which is 21 open to all comers and which simply is trying to advance 22 the goal of source identification. 23 holder wishes to include a component in the mark to 24 somehow advertise the good, the service to convey a 25 different message, that doesn't get in the way of the Alderson Reporting Company That's And if the mark Official - Subject to Final Review 47 1 2 source identification at -CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Well, but it seems 3 to me that you're defining the government program 4 differently than the government would. 5 suggesting that there's more to their program than just 6 source identification. 7 MR. CONNELL: I think they're That is not clear at all in 8 the Lanham Act. 9 Act, as identified by this Court in Park ’N Fly -- and In fact, the only purpose of the Lanham 10 this was a citation to, I believe, the -- the Senate 11 Report, was the reduction of consumer confusion and the 12 protection of the goodwill of the mark holder. 13 was no suggestion that this was a -- 14 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: 15 MR. CONNELL: 16 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: There Well, we heard -- -- a politeness statute. Well, we heard from 17 Mr. Stewart that they thought the disparagement aspect 18 would distract from the commercial identification. 19 I think that's what he said. 20 MR. CONNELL: 21 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: 22 that's -- that's not really their purpose or -- 23 MR. CONNELL: I -- Yes. And you're saying Well, I'll say they -- that's 24 nowhere in the legislative history and that's nowhere in 25 the legislation itself. I mean, that seems to be pulled Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 48 1 out of thin air by the government, who, again, in their 2 brief talks about reducing the -- the level of insult or 3 the occasion of insult to customers. 4 not part of the Lanham Act. 5 commercial purpose of the Lanham Act. 6 That's not part of the JUSTICE GINSBURG: 7 thing about a scandalous mark? 8 impermissible? 9 10 MR. CONNELL: That's -- that's Would you say the same Would that be equally I think that conclusion is inevitable. 11 If there are no further questions. 12 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: 13 MR. CONNELL: 14 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: 15 Thank you, counsel. Thank you. Mr. Stewart, two minutes. 16 REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OF MALCOLM L. STEWART 17 ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER 18 MR. STEWART: 19 Let make three quick points. 20 Mr. Connell has said that the government -- 21 that the government registration program regulates only 22 the expressive and not the commercial aspect of the 23 mark, and I think that's getting it exactly backwards. 24 The -- Mr. Tam wants to do two things with the mark The 25 Slants. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice. He wants to use the mark himself in relation to Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 49 1 his band, and he wants to be able to sue other people 2 who use it in a way that would cause him commercial 3 harm. 4 second thing. 5 to use the mark. 6 available for infringement, but -- but that's entirely 7 regulating the commercial aspects of the conduct. 8 9 And denial of a registration affects only the It places no restrictions on his ability It may limit the remedies that are The second thing is Mr. Connell's position clearly is that the test for constitutionality of a 10 registration condition is, could the government ban this 11 speech altogether? 12 eviscerate the trademark registration program. 13 obviously, as -- as Justice Kagan has pointed out, there 14 are a lot of other content-based registration criteria. 15 And putting that in place would Most And in addition, I'd point out one of the 16 prerequisites to registration is that you be using the 17 mark in commerce. 18 speech, we'd ask by what authority could the government 19 make the right to speech contingent on providing goods 20 and services in commerce. 21 If this were truly a suppression of Finally, Justice Kagan, you mentioned 22 commercial speech. 23 communicative aspect to this program. 24 of the principal register is not just an ancillary 25 consequence of this program. And there is an important government The preparation It's the whole point to Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 50 1 provide a list of trademarks so other people know what 2 has been approved, what's off limits. 3 And the consequence of Mr. Connell's 4 position is that the government would have to place on a 5 principal register, communicate to foreign countries the 6 biased racial epithets, insulting caricatures of 7 venerated religious figures. 8 government has to do that can't be coextensive with the 9 test for whether private people can engage in that form 10 The test for whether the of expression. 11 JUSTICE ALITO: Mr. Stewart, you really 12 think that speech can be restricted by the government on 13 the ground that foreign countries may object to it? 14 Could -- could the government do that with 15 copyright? 16 copyrighted in this country that are deeply offensive to 17 some foreign countries, and yet, the FBI enforces the 18 copyright laws. 19 I mean, an awful lot of things are MR. STEWART: I would agree that with the 20 copyright is different. 21 more fundamental role in free expression than trademark 22 law has played, but the government, at the very least, 23 has a significant interest in not incorporating into its 24 own communications words and symbols that the public and 25 foreign countries will find offensive. It's historically played a far Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 51 1 2 3 4 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Thank you, counsel. Case is submitted. (Whereupon, at 11:03 a.m., the case in the above-entitled matter was submitted.) 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 52 A a.m 1:16 3:2 51:3 ability 3:16 49:4 able 4:18 23:7 49:1 above-entitled 1:14 51:4 abridgement 37:19 absolutely 12:11 19:12 27:25 accept 46:6 accepts 25:17 access 3:20 account 25:24 acknowledged 17:13 acre 45:6 Act 16:16 31:19 42:4 43:6 47:8 47:9 48:4,5 Act's 29:5 actions 23:12 activity 14:20 29:2 actors 8:9 11:22 18:8 34:2 addition 36:7 49:15 administering 21:23 24:22 advance 7:1 42:3 43:8 46:21 advantage 45:7 advertise 46:24 advertisement 8:16 40:20 advertisements 29:9 advertising 10:20 28:25 agency 24:3 agree 50:19 Agreed 42:21 air 36:3 48:1 airwaves 35:22 akin 40:19 alike 12:12 Alito 4:24 18:4 18:16 19:14 37:23 43:10,23 44:5 50:11 alleging 22:21 allowed 15:14 altogether 49:11 Amendment 3:22 4:2,17,23 4:24 5:21 11:24 19:7 20:18 27:24 37:20 38:2 American 25:25 amicus 8:18 analysis 15:22 23:23 ancillary 49:24 and/or 18:11 answer 6:23 9:18,22,22 10:1,2,11,17 10:20,21,22 13:15 19:14,16 30:1 33:17 44:18 46:4,4 46:12 answers 14:2 46:5 antithetical 11:19 anybody 14:6 31:25 38:22 Appeal 20:21 22:2 appealing 29:13 appearance 26:13 APPEARAN... 1:17 appeared 17:14 applicant 7:8 22:3,14 23:4 application 3:14 6:6,9,10 9:2 21:25 23:4 25:14 applications 26:2 applied 14:25 applies 13:14 19:24 apply 15:23 23:22 25:18 43:25 44:1 approaching 38:16 approved 25:5 25:21 26:24,25 39:5 50:2 approves 23:3 argue 5:21 24:9 argument 1:15 2:2,5,8 3:3,6 6:21 7:1 27:8 31:2 37:13 41:10,11 48:16 argument's 29:13 arguments 33:13,15 arm 32:14 ascribe 38:22 Asian 40:18 Asian-Americ... 17:15 Asian-Americ... 9:16 17:18 Asians 27:13,20 aside 15:6,23 asked 45:9 asking 29:11 33:24 aspect 18:15 31:18 35:5,17 36:25 38:25 40:8,11,12,13 40:25 43:13 47:17 48:22 49:23 aspects 38:14 40:6 49:7 assert 30:21 associate 22:10 40:22 association 39:15 Assume 12:2 assuming 14:12 21:16 attacks 15:11 attempt 8:9 21:4 attempted 4:20 15:25 attempting 20:19 24:18 attorney 17:12 22:1,8,12 23:3 attractive 18:10 authority 24:2,3 49:18 available 16:3 29:18 31:12 49:6 awarding 25:22 awful 50:15 awfully 40:7 30:8 36:18 40:22,23 45:23 49:1 bands 4:6 40:21 banning 36:7 bar 9:4 Barry 14:16 16:4 based 3:13 12:6 13:4 19:8,11 19:13 21:18 basic 9:25 21:22 24:13 25:17 basically 8:22 basis 9:13 14:15 38:14 42:10 beer 34:19 behalf 1:20,21 2:4,7,10 3:7 27:9 48:17 beliefs 3:13 25:25 believe 6:8 9:6 14:19 31:9 34:14 37:21 41:2 44:10 47:10 beneath 33:3 B benefits 25:19 B 42:17 29:22,24 30:6 B&B 8:13 30:9,24 36:1 back 16:19 43:2 19:15 32:12 beyond 34:13 36:23 37:3 biased 50:6 43:10 44:15 big 29:10 34:10 backwards bit 28:23 48:23 block 22:17,19 bad 7:20 12:15 blurry 40:7 12:24 13:17,18 board 20:21 13:22 14:6,8 22:2 32:17,20 17:4 34:23 33:7 45:2 boards 32:18 balance 27:4 Boos 14:16 16:4 ban 13:14 35:21 boy 10:19 34:5 49:10 branch 17:25 band 3:15 17:20 24:3 27:13,18 29:7 breadth 31:2 Alderson Reporting Company Official - Subject to Final Review 53 breaking 18:18 Breyer 7:11 8:4 9:17 10:16 11:2 32:4,6,15 33:22 34:4,18 34:21 36:14 37:2 40:19 44:15 46:3,16 Breyer's 37:4 brief 13:3 48:2 briefs 4:25 8:18 bright 25:20 bright-line 26:8 bring 5:1 6:10 14:21 broad 20:15 21:7 29:18 broadly 14:23 15:25 brought 5:21 brush 20:15,15 21:7 bulletin 32:17 32:18,19 burden 30:4,6,9 35:4,13,16 36:24 burdened 29:15 burdening 40:5 41:1 business 10:7 34:2,5,12,13 buy 46:11 caricatures 50:6 Carlin's 35:9 case 3:4,11 5:12 9:15 11:9 13:1 13:13 15:4 23:23 27:17 28:19 29:20 31:11 32:2 35:6 38:8,11 39:24,24 40:15 44:14 51:2,3 cases 18:21 24:15,16 28:23 cast 18:10 casts 12:9 21:6 categories 13:8 38:5 41:13 category 13:9,12 13:21 38:1 cause 11:10,11 41:20 49:2 caused 11:7 celebrate 32:8 celebrating 31:6 celebration 33:7 46:8 certain 43:1 44:20,22,22 certainly 4:9 5:18 8:8 13:20 14:10 16:24 19:10 42:7 challenge 5:21 42:9 C challenging 37:7 C 1:21 2:1,6 3:1 Chief 3:3,8 6:20 27:8 9:10 16:7 23:9 California 35:15 23:18,21 27:6 call 41:16 27:10 31:1,14 called 8:13 29:7 31:20 40:3 34:24 35:1 43:11 44:16 calling 28:24 47:2,14,16,21 calm 46:19 48:12,14,18 canceling 37:19 51:1 capable 37:18 choose 25:6 car 39:8 chooses 29:12 care 33:22 chosen 45:7 cigarettes 44:9 44:10 circle 33:2,5 circular 6:22 circumstance 28:21 citation 47:10 claim 6:22 13:8 classic 13:1 14:13 41:6 clause 28:10 29:21 clear 25:21 26:7 47:7 clearly 4:11 15:24 19:10,11 19:12,19 45:23 49:9 clerks 10:3 client 27:12 28:24 30:6 close 5:6 coextensive 50:8 Cohen 35:15 Coke 11:18 come 5:6 36:23 43:10 comers 31:13 46:21 comes 5:15 23:11 34:7 40:25 comfort 23:5 coming 42:23 commentary 17:17 commerce 3:17 7:9 11:21 22:11 23:6 25:5 49:17,20 commercial 8:1 8:9 11:22 18:8 28:9 31:19 34:2 40:8,11 40:13 42:4 43:12,15 44:2 44:7,13 47:18 48:5,22 49:2,7 49:22 common 8:20 30:23 communicate 18:11 50:5 communicates 38:24 40:17 communication 8:14 16:2 communicatio... 50:24 communicative 49:23 community 15:11 compete 30:7,13 30:14 competing 11:17 competition 6:18 22:21 competitor 34:23 competitors 11:20 25:4 completely 46:20 complimentary 9:3 15:14 component 40:16 45:22 46:23 components 37:5 comprehensive 32:1 concentrated 25:10 concept 18:17 concern 15:7 24:17 25:11 26:23 concerned 6:21 28:1 concluded 7:25 conclusion 48:9 condition 49:10 Alderson Reporting Company conduct 34:2,4 49:7 Confederate 39:22 confidence 23:6 confines 21:13 confronted 14:18 confusingly 25:7 confusion 29:6 41:20 42:5 43:6 47:11 Congress 4:20 7:24 8:23 10:8 11:13,20 18:13 23:14 28:15,17 37:24 connection 37:6 37:8 41:19 Connell 1:21 2:6 27:7,8,10,23 28:2,5,8,20 29:16 30:3,5 30:12,14,19 31:9,17 32:2 32:11 33:20,25 34:17,20 35:4 35:13,23 36:4 36:23 37:10,21 37:23 38:4,11 39:3,23 40:13 41:11,14 42:2 42:10,14,17,21 42:25 43:4,17 44:3,12 45:20 46:14,17 47:7 47:15,20,23 48:9,13,20 Connell's 49:8 50:3 consequence 49:25 50:3 consider 29:14 constitute 28:8 constitutionali... 5:19 49:9 constraint 12:5 Official - Subject to Final Review 54 14:14 21:17 consumer 8:20 42:5 43:6 47:11 consumers 22:10 contained 30:10 contempt 14:21 content 17:1 36:8 40:1 41:16 content-based 49:14 content-neutral 42:8 context 5:10 25:1 31:25 42:24 contingent 49:19 continue 23:5 contracts 29:1 control 39:11 45:22 controlled 40:1 controversy 11:11 convey 8:11 46:24 conveyed 36:12 conveying 43:21 conveys 41:2 copy 7:4 39:6 copyright 3:23 3:23,25 4:1,11 4:18,21,21 5:2 5:8,10,11,13 5:14,17,23 6:2 6:3,9,11 16:20 16:22,23 17:22 17:22,25 50:15 50:18,20 copyrightability 6:12 copyrightable 5:20 copyrighted 50:16 correct 6:15 28:2 37:21 corrupt 12:18 12:18 19:19 cost 18:24 counsel 6:20 27:6 48:12 51:1 count 17:5 countries 38:19 50:5,13,17,25 country 50:16 couple 14:1 course 21:23 24:22 41:25 court 1:1,15 3:9 14:17 25:16,21 27:11 30:24 36:3,6 37:11 37:16 47:9 Court's 35:20 courts 23:10,11 23:11 24:5 create 13:12 created 44:21 creates 20:18 creating 44:19 creation 39:11 criteria 25:22 39:6 49:14 criticism 11:25 15:1 cultural 18:3 culture 4:5 customers 34:3 34:5 48:3 32:14 deceptive 29:8 decided 15:4 decides 22:8 24:23 32:8 deciding 18:12 22:12 decision 20:21 35:21 decisions 26:14 decline 11:25 27:21 declined 20:22 dedicate 44:23 deeply 50:16 defamation 13:10 defend 5:18 defense 21:6 defines 16:16 defining 23:24 47:3 degree 23:6 deliberately 26:15 Democrats 12:12,18,21 denial 21:3 30:9 49:3 denied 3:14 6:10 17:23,24 20:24 30:6 denies 28:11 deny 5:2,8 18:4 18:6 29:21 37:24 denying 28:18 41:1 D Department D 3:1 1:19 D.C 1:11,19 depend 10:14 da 46:11,11,11 11:8 31:2 danger 8:17 depending 19:4 20:18 Deputy 1:18 day 35:9 describe 17:7 dealing 11:1 21:22 debate 3:17 15:8 described 10:11 descriptive 7:7 22:9 41:20 design 39:11 40:1 designed 34:8 desire 23:15 destroy 45:8,8 detail 17:12 determine 11:13 11:20 development 8:1 devise 8:9 difference 6:2 29:10 31:11 40:10 different 10:12 10:13 13:7 16:3 24:4 28:15,23 39:6 42:22 46:20,25 50:20 differently 47:4 difficulty 43:12 diluting 33:15 DIRECTOR 1:3 dirty 35:9 disassociate 23:15 disassociating 39:18 discourse 8:20 discrete 13:25 discretionary 24:1,2 discriminate 14:15 32:13 discriminating 13:4 38:13 discrimination 13:1 20:16 21:9 24:16 25:10 44:6,12 discussion 16:9 disfavored 20:17,19 21:5 24:18,19 disparage 3:12 Alderson Reporting Company 11:23 17:6 31:6,23 37:6 disparaged 10:15 20:25 22:17 disparagement 3:19 4:10 7:3 7:17 9:4 10:7 10:21,22 11:4 11:9 12:9,11 17:23 22:25 28:10 29:21 34:24 47:17 disparaging 6:23,24 7:25 9:11 10:14,16 11:7 14:9 15:25 23:13 27:2 31:15,24 40:9 45:16,20 disrepute 14:22 distinct 13:7 distinction 5:22 12:13 15:13 16:7 19:5,8 28:16 31:21 distinctions 12:6 41:16,24 42:3 42:13 distinguish 5:10 21:18 distinguished 19:17 distract 8:20 10:19 47:18 distracted 9:24 distracting 10:5 10:17,20 11:12 distraction 8:25 10:23,25 11:1 11:4,7,14 distractions 10:9 diverse 25:24 doing 12:7 30:17 30:18 35:6 door 46:13 Official - Subject to Final Review 55 doubt 38:22 draw 25:20 28:15,17 drink 11:17 dual-purpose 8:14 due 35:20 E E 2:1 3:1,1 earlier 18:8 37:4 37:13 edgy 26:16 effect 17:17 25:23 either 4:21 6:17 7:10 12:18,22 emanate 8:6 embassies 14:25 embassy 14:20 emblem 19:23 20:2,3 encourage 11:21 11:25 34:1 endorse 29:11 enforce 23:12 enforcement 23:16 24:4 enforces 50:17 engage 3:17 14:19 50:9 engaging 29:2 entire 16:11 36:19 entirely 16:3 25:20 26:17 49:6 entitled 6:11 16:22 18:14 entitlement 29:5 epithets 9:8 11:10 15:10 50:6 equal 19:5 equally 48:7 especially 16:24 ESQ 1:18,21 2:3 2:6,9 essential 22:5 essentially 20:23 ethnic 39:19 evidence 17:16 evidently 7:24 eviscerate 49:12 exactly 12:7 40:2 48:23 exaggerate 27:19 examiner 17:13 examining 17:11 22:1,8,12 23:3 example 7:6 8:12 12:16 13:16 15:2,3 25:13 41:6 43:13 44:7 examples 10:4 26:12,22 27:1 excluded 6:25 exclusive 30:21 exclusively 18:14 Excuse 37:1 executive 24:3 exercise 24:1,2 exist 10:9 37:18 40:21 express 4:8 28:12 29:24 33:9 45:5 expressed 12:17 17:1 44:18 expressing 4:7 4:16 29:22 expression 3:17 4:3 16:15 18:2 32:22 50:10,21 expressive 8:7 14:19 18:5,7 43:12,16,25 48:22 expressly 36:6 extensive 30:23 extent 10:14 29:11 40:25 45:11 extra 36:1 extraneous 33:13,14 extraordinary 15:12 extremely 12:4 eyes 27:19 4:15,17,23,24 5:20 11:24 19:7 20:17 21:25 25:1,16 26:5,11 27:24 37:19 38:2 first-line 10:11 fit 37:25 flag 19:23 20:2,3 39:22 F flat 42:9 facility 15:24 Fly 47:9 fact 4:5 26:13 focus 18:14 35:14 36:10,15 follow-up 10:2 36:24 40:2,8 following 8:1 47:8 force 33:15 factors 43:8 foreign 14:20,21 facts 27:17 14:25 38:19 fairly 13:1 50:5,13,17,25 fall 18:20 42:9 form 10:19 falls 13:9 11:21 17:17 falsely 37:6,8 24:21 34:8 41:19 44:20,20 50:9 far 9:23 23:24 forth 4:6 12:12 50:20 38:24 favor 29:25 forum 16:2 favors 29:23 31:10 41:6 FBI 50:17 foster 18:2 Federal 23:9,16 found 16:5,6 24:24 25:2 17:16,19 feelings 45:2,5 four-word 5:23 feet 14:20 5:24 fellow 15:15 framed 23:19 festival 31:4 fraud 38:7 fighting 13:11 free 4:3 18:2 figure 37:15 50:21 40:9 fulfill 33:1 figures 50:7 fully 44:18 file 6:15 fun 27:19 filed 6:5,9 21:25 function 8:5 22:14 16:18 42:12 filing 22:20 46:9 Finally 49:21 functional 41:21 find 50:25 46:10,10 Finley 25:23 fundamental fire 18:23 5:22 50:21 first 3:4,22 4:2 further 7:18 Alderson Reporting Company 26:9 48:11 furthest 23:15 23:21 G G 3:1 geared 38:21 general 1:18 18:19,22,23 32:22 44:11 generally 6:19 16:14 generic 7:7 22:9 geographic 41:21 George 35:8 getting 30:16 48:23 GINSBURG 6:1 6:13 9:1 16:25 17:9 22:15,22 25:8 35:7,11 35:18,20,24 39:17 48:6 give 5:4,7 14:1 15:2 21:15 25:6 38:25 43:13 givers 25:24 gives 26:23 giving 23:4 go 22:2 23:24 34:12 37:3,16 goal 46:22 goals 43:5 goes 32:11 going 5:3 18:25 34:12 36:1 good 12:14,23 13:18,23 17:3 19:18 40:15 46:24 Good-bye 41:9 goodness 34:21 goods 8:6 43:21 49:19 goodwill 47:12 Official - Subject to Final Review 56 government 3:21,24 4:1,12 5:1 6:21 12:2,4 14:12,21 15:16 15:24 16:8 18:17,18,21,24 18:25 19:17 20:19 21:13,15 21:16,17,21,21 23:10,16,24 24:6,15,17 25:18,19 27:20 29:11,20,23,25 31:3,3 32:1,7 34:1 35:2,4 38:13,13,15,18 38:19,23,23,25 39:2,5,9,10,13 39:15,18,24,25 39:25 40:1,5 41:1,22 42:24 43:2,5,7 44:7 44:19,21 45:15 46:1 47:3,4 48:1,20,21 49:10,18,22 50:4,8,12,14 50:22 government's 15:20 33:21 grant 25:24 grants 25:22 great 10:18 44:10 greater 38:25 ground 5:8 15:10 17:23 20:24 50:13 group 7:20 9:9 12:14,15 13:25 groups 19:1,2 40:9 Grove 44:24,24 45:9,13 46:7 46:18 guess 19:13 31:20 H Haddonfield 1:21 hammer 20:23 harm 11:10 45:14 49:3 hate 5:4 health 44:10 hear 3:3 13:15 heard 6:12 45:18 47:14,16 hearing 5:5 Heb 25:14 held 14:24 help 7:18 helps 9:23 hinder 7:25 historical 9:6 historically 4:2 5:12 13:4,7 16:15 20:16 26:15 37:25 38:6 41:13 50:20 history 39:13 47:24 holder 29:22 46:23 47:12 holders 29:18,23 39:14 Honor 46:18 hostile 45:5 hostility 21:1 houses 44:23 hypothetical 5:5 15:3 23:19 27:17 28:19 hypotheticals 28:16 I ID 39:25 idea 12:17 identification 16:17 18:15 45:24 46:22 47:1,6,18 identified 27:1 43:22 45:24 47:9 identifier 8:3 18:9 43:19 identifies 8:15 40:14 identify 7:13 8:10,22 10:19 11:18 32:24 33:1,12,16 45:17 ideological 36:11 ignore 4:5 illegal 14:18 immoral 22:16 impermissible 48:8 important 4:12 12:5,13 49:22 importantly 25:8 imposed 36:9 imposes 21:12 incentive 25:6 incentivization 4:3 include 6:24 38:6,7 46:23 including 36:20 inconsistency 26:3 inconsistent 21:2 26:14 incorporating 50:23 indicates 6:8 indication 41:21 individual 37:14 38:21 inevitable 48:10 inexplicably 43:24 inextricably 43:19 infringement 6:3,7,17 22:13 22:21 23:12 25:3 49:6 infringes 23:7 inherit 40:20 insignia 41:22 insofar 27:25 instance 5:12 25:22 instances 10:4 26:14 instinct 15:4 institution 37:7 institutions 3:12 insult 34:3,5 48:2,3 insulting 26:16 33:5 50:6 insults 34:6,13 intellectual 4:19 18:1 intended 8:11 8:21 14:21 18:2 intent 17:14,19 26:16 interest 15:7 39:18 43:7 50:23 interested 13:15 interfere 45:21 interfering 45:11 intermediate 24:9 Internet 17:17 interrupt 19:14 intertwined 43:18,20,24 involve 16:3 involved 12:3 39:2 issue 3:10 4:23 4:25 10:7 11:9 25:23 issued 39:25 issues 4:17 Alderson Reporting Company item 34:6 J January 1:12 jerk 34:16,25 Jiffy 8:12 Joe 34:16,25 JOHN 1:21 2:6 27:8 Jones 34:16,25 judged 25:17 Justice 1:19 3:3 3:8,23 4:4,10 4:24 6:1,13,20 7:11 8:4 9:1,10 9:17 10:16 11:2,15 12:2 12:10 13:6 14:3,4,11 15:16,20 16:7 16:25 17:9 18:4,16 19:6 19:12,14,22 20:1,5,8,11 21:8,14 22:15 22:22 23:9,18 23:21 24:6,12 25:8 26:6 27:6 27:10,16,24 28:3,13,14,22 30:1,4,11,13 30:16 31:1,14 31:20 32:3,4,5 32:6,7,11,15 32:16 33:22 34:4,18,21 35:7,11,18,19 35:20,24 36:14 37:1,2,3,4,12 37:22,23 38:10 39:17 40:3,19 41:4,14 42:6 42:11,16,18,22 43:1,10,23 44:5,15 46:3 46:16 47:2,14 47:16,21 48:6 Official - Subject to Final Review 57 48:12,14,18 49:13,21 50:11 51:1 Justice's 43:11 44:16 justification 5:5 10:12 47:8 48:4,5 large 25:11 largely 27:17 Laughter 28:7 32:10 35:10 law 10:3 14:18 14:22 16:5 18:1 24:4 K 30:22,23 41:5 K 1:3 41:17,25 42:12 Kagan 11:15 50:22 12:2,10 13:6 laws 6:17 13:3,3 14:3,11 19:6 13:10 34:22,24 19:12,22 20:1 35:1,2 50:18 20:5,8,11 21:8 lecture 31:4 21:14 32:3,5,7 Lee 1:3 3:4 32:11 35:19 leeway 38:25 38:10 41:14 legal 25:1 29:19 42:6,11,16,18 29:21 30:7 42:22 43:1 legislation 47:25 49:13,21 legislative 47:24 KENNEDY legitimate 26:17 3:23 4:4,10 43:7 14:4 15:16,20 let's 12:16 31:3 24:6,12 27:16 37:3 27:24 28:3,14 letter 34:11 41:4 letters 33:3 kind 8:15 11:13 34:10,11,11 11:24 17:25 letting 10:8 29:6 39:8 level 8:25 48:2 44:22 libel 13:3,10 kinds 10:12,13 35:1 37:17 42:13 38:1 know 7:12,21,22 libelism 13:6 7:22 33:11,19 libels 37:13 33:23 37:12 license 39:7,20 46:9 50:1 39:20,20 known 11:10 light 18:10 knows 17:5 likelihood 25:3 limit 3:16,20 L 5:19 14:5 16:1 L 1:18 2:3,9 3:6 38:4 49:5 48:16 limitation 41:12 land 44:24 limited 31:10 Lanham 16:16 36:5 29:5 31:19 limits 5:10 50:2 42:4 43:6 47:8 line 18:21 25:20 40:7 list 25:11 50:1 little 33:2 34:7 34:10 living 41:22 logos 4:6 long 8:23 9:8 Look 44:19 looking 13:12 losing 33:15 lot 17:12,16 26:11 40:7 49:14 50:15 lots 18:19 low 13:9 Lube 8:13 30:8 marks 7:6,7 23:17 25:6 27:1 28:8,11 31:24 38:21 39:4,13 marriage 39:7 material 5:2,20 matter 1:14 12:19,22 32:5 36:10 51:4 matters 18:2 mean 4:9 15:17 19:4,10 20:8 20:20 21:12 31:2 32:7 34:21 41:16,18 M 42:8 47:25 majority 14:17 50:15 makeup 27:19 meanings 8:19 MALCOLM meets 24:10 1:18 2:3,9 3:6 members 15:11 48:16 mentioned manner 36:5,14 49:21 36:15,19,22 merely 7:6 22:8 manufacturer message 9:25 11:17 44:9 10:23 11:12 mark 3:12,15,16 18:11 36:12,18 6:23 7:9 8:14 39:11 40:18 8:19 12:17,19 43:20 45:22 12:20 16:16 46:2,2,25 18:8 22:9,11 messages 8:11 22:18,20 23:5 10:6 15:7 23:7 25:5 20:20 24:18,19 27:13 29:7,18 44:25,25 45:1 29:22,23 30:10 45:14,16,20 30:22 34:8 MICHELLE 35:5,17 36:25 1:3 38:8 39:12,14 million 33:7,8 39:16 40:14 miniature 8:16 41:18 43:20 ministerial 46:1,22,23 39:10 47:12 48:7,23 minority 7:20 48:24,25 49:5 9:9 49:17 minutes 48:15 market 4:8 misdescriptive marketplace 41:20 Alderson Reporting Company misunderstood 26:21 money 18:24 morning 3:4 motivated 36:11 music 4:16,22 40:22,23 45:25 N N 2:1,1 3:1 47:9 N.J 1:21 name 8:12 17:20 29:11 30:2 40:22,23 41:22 names 40:21 narrow 37:25 national 3:13 19:24 20:25 nature 15:1 19:4 19:8 32:1 necessary 30:7 need 29:4 negative 28:12 29:22 32:13 36:11 41:3 net 12:9 neutral 24:4 29:24 never 38:2 new 5:14 13:12 nice 7:19 8:24 32:21 Nike's 43:14 non-Asians 27:18 noncommercial 28:9,11 30:10 31:18 35:5,17 36:24 40:5,6 40:12,17,24 nonconfrontat... 15:9 normal 46:8,9 noteworthy 16:21 notice 25:4 notwithstandi... Official - Subject to Final Review 58 36:8 number 7:3 29:18 O O 2:1 3:1 object 50:13 objectionable 5:2 objective 7:16 9:21 32:23,23 33:1 45:16 objectives 24:15 31:19 42:4 objects 46:1 obviously 9:14 11:23 21:1 24:5 38:8 49:13 occasion 48:3 occur 25:3 28:21 offensive 17:20 50:16,25 office 1:5 5:13 16:23 officials 13:22 Oh 34:21 okay 14:6 25:14 25:15 31:22 35:21 42:18 45:2 46:4 omnipresent 15:17 one-quarter 45:6 ones 46:11 only-celebrati... 31:22 open 23:12 46:21 opened 46:13 opinion 14:17 opposed 29:23 opposite 40:2 oral 1:14 2:2,5 3:6 27:8 order 6:6 original 5:15 17:25 outer 38:4 outrageous 27:25 outside 9:4 25:1 overlap 22:6 23:1 owner 7:8 22:11 36:18 39:12 P P 3:1 Pacifica 36:4,8 package 44:9 PAGE 2:2 parallel 27:17 park 41:5,6,8,24 42:19,20 47:9 part 4:4 21:20 21:20 37:4,8 40:14 44:1,2 44:23 48:4,4 participate 31:7 particular 7:17 9:9 10:25 11:3 13:21 15:6 16:9 18:13 patent 1:4 39:7 peaceful 44:24 44:24,25 45:9 45:13 46:7,18 people 8:24 13:21,25 26:14 26:18 32:19,21 33:13,14 40:22 44:23 49:1 50:1,9 perceived 21:3 percent 10:18 perform 40:23 performance 36:16 performs 21:23 person 5:14,15 8:18 12:14,15 22:11 27:2 37:6 person's 19:8 41:22 personal 15:10 persons 3:12 41:19 perspective 20:18 Petitioner 1:6,20 2:4,10 3:7 48:17 phrase 5:23,24 17:2,2,24,25 35:14 43:14 phrases 5:14 16:23 physical 34:6 44:22 pick 18:8 picking 10:8 Piney 8:13 pithy 5:16 place 34:22,25 36:5,14,15,19 36:22 40:21 44:9 45:6 46:19 49:11 50:4 placed 7:5 places 3:20 45:4 49:4 plate 39:21 played 50:20,22 please 3:9 11:15 27:11 plurality 14:23 16:4 point 4:7 5:16 8:18 12:22,23 17:21 18:12,18 21:5,5 30:20 32:12 33:8 43:4 49:15,25 pointed 13:2 32:16 49:13 points 28:17 48:19 poison 34:19 police 18:22 policy 21:2 politeness 47:15 political 4:17 13:21 18:3 36:12 40:17 politicians 12:17 12:20 19:18,18 portrait 41:22 pose 4:22 position 5:13 28:4,5 33:21 33:23 49:8 50:4 positive 8:11 11:12 29:25 32:9 possible 23:15 23:22 possibly 5:6 post 14:19 15:6 potential 19:5,6 19:7 25:4 26:3 potentially 22:1 powerful 4:12 practice 9:6,14 precise 10:12 11:8 precludes 12:8 12:11 prefer 11:20,21 preparation 49:23 prerequisites 22:3,6,7 23:1,2 23:8 49:16 prescribable 41:13 prescribed 38:6 presentations 31:5 presumptively 24:20 prevent 9:23 11:24 prevents 9:23 Alderson Reporting Company previously 7:9 pride 17:15 40:18 principal 49:24 50:5 print 5:24 private 39:14 50:9 pro-Shakespe... 31:5 probably 9:6 10:3,6 problem 40:4 problems 19:5,7 product 7:14 8:24 9:24,25 11:19 22:10 32:24 33:2 34:10,24 products 8:12 11:23 18:10 34:23 program 3:21 3:24 4:1,12 6:21,24 14:12 16:8,11,14 18:18,21 21:13 21:21,24 23:10 23:24 24:7,15 24:17,19,22 25:19 29:16 31:3,4,12,22 32:1,22,23 33:15 38:13,15 38:17,20,25 39:1 42:24 43:5 45:17 47:3,5 48:21 49:12,23,25 programs 12:4 18:25 21:15,17 prohibit 4:20 prohibited 44:6 44:13 prohibiting 10:13 prohibits 3:11 Official - Subject to Final Review 59 promote 11:22 24:18 40:8,10 promoting 8:23 15:8 properly-drawn 27:20 property 4:19 18:1 39:25 44:20,22 proposed 20:22 protected 13:25 protecting 29:12 protection 4:19 4:21 5:2,8,11 5:17 7:17 17:22 18:22,23 19:1,5 28:18 30:20 35:25 38:3,5 47:12 protections 29:19 30:7 protects 27:25 Proud 27:13 prove 37:16 provide 10:21 19:1 43:2 50:1 provides 10:5 18:19 24:22 25:4 43:1 providing 18:22 18:23 49:19 provision 3:10 3:13,20 7:3,18 7:19 provocative 26:16 provoke 45:1 PTO 3:14 17:4 21:23 24:1,21 25:5 26:1,12 26:24 PTO's 3:15 9:6 9:14 public 8:6 15:5 15:23 16:10 18:19,23,24 25:25 29:6 37:14 41:5,5,6 41:8,24 42:19 42:20 50:24 publication 24:25 25:2 38:19,20 publishes 24:24 38:18 pulled 47:25 purely 16:17 purpose 7:13,16 8:21 9:21 11:4 33:12 43:9 45:8,9,12,15 46:17 47:8,22 48:5 purposes 18:5,7 pursue 6:6 put 8:24 33:2 34:6 putting 31:4 49:11 read 46:11 really 7:5 19:15 26:25 43:11 44:15 47:22 50:11 reason 20:15 29:13 30:9 reasonable 3:20 27:2 reasonably 24:14 REBUTTAL 2:8 48:16 received 29:24 receives 26:1 reclaim 17:14 26:17 recognize 16:21 recognized 17:18 30:24 38:1 recordation 39:4 Q reduce 43:6 qua 8:21 reduces 25:3 question 4:15 reducing 42:5 9:18,19,20 48:2 10:2 11:3 reduction 47:11 28:22 30:2 reference 16:17 33:18,24 35:16 regarded 38:2 37:4,10 40:15 regime 6:2 46:20 43:11 44:4,13 register 3:14 6:3 44:16 45:10,25 6:6,9,11 11:17 questions 6:12 14:9 16:23 16:4 22:13 20:22 24:24 25:9 48:11 25:2 27:13,15 quick 48:19 27:21 35:12 quite 32:15 39:3 49:24 38:12,16 50:5 registered 7:10 R 18:13 24:23 R 3:1 33:3 29:4,7 36:17 racial 9:7 11:10 38:18,22 43:15 15:10 39:19 registering 6:22 50:6 22:17,20 raise 19:3 26:23 registrability raises 24:17 7:5 registration 3:11 4:1,22 10:13 16:14 20:24 21:4 22:4,6 28:11 29:16,17,19 30:25 36:2 37:24 39:7,7,8 41:2,18 48:21 49:3,10,12,14 49:16 registrations 39:8,9 regulates 48:21 regulating 49:7 regulation 19:17 20:9,17 regulatory 29:17 rejected 27:1 relate 7:23,23 24:14 related 7:12 9:21 24:14 relation 9:16 11:3 48:25 relentlessly 32:9 religious 50:7 remains 5:13 remedies 49:5 repeating 34:9 Report 47:11 Republicans 12:12 republishes 38:23 reserve 27:4 reserved 32:20 resort 30:20 respect 33:23 respond 45:19 Respondent 1:9 1:22 2:7 27:9 Respondent's 3:14,16 restrict 15:25 restricted 50:12 Alderson Reporting Company restriction 3:21 6:13 14:13 21:12 36:21 restrictions 5:11 7:4 24:8 36:6,9 36:10 46:8,9 49:4 retained 39:12 right 4:17 8:4,7 9:17 17:23 19:9,20,21 21:10 22:18 23:20 26:7 30:21 41:15 44:5,20,22 49:19 rigorous 44:1 ROBERTS 3:3 6:20 9:10 16:7 23:9,18,21 27:6 31:1,14 31:20 40:3 47:2,14,16,21 48:12,14 51:1 rock 4:6 role 50:21 room 15:6,24 rule 26:9 rules 15:10 ruling 3:15 run 6:24 running 23:9 25:9 S S 2:1 3:1 sales 40:10 satisfies 22:3 satisfy 23:7 saying 5:22,23 8:24 12:20 14:8,8 15:18 18:7 19:18 21:8 22:25 32:25 34:15,23 34:25 35:2,7 37:7,14 38:12 Official - Subject to Final Review 60 45:15 46:7 47:21 says 7:19 8:23 13:17 20:11 32:25 33:5 38:17 scandalous 22:15,16 48:7 school 15:5,9,11 15:23 schoolteacher 15:17,21 scope 5:19 16:8 scrutiny 24:10 seclusion 46:19 second 16:20 24:21 26:22 37:8 49:4,8 Section 3:19 6:16 30:22 41:18 42:17 sections 42:15 see 8:12 12:22 22:2 33:6,8 45:13 seek 29:18 30:20 seeks 33:16 selectively 29:21 self-consciously 26:18 Senate 47:10 sends 38:19 sense 11:11 37:22 sentiment 11:19 separate 43:25 separating 43:12 series 31:4 serious 19:4 serve 9:21 18:9 22:9 45:12 served 16:15 45:25 serves 8:15 39:4 service 3:15 16:16 24:21 40:15 45:25 46:24 services 8:6 18:19 21:22 43:22 49:20 set 15:5 setting 15:23 seven 35:9,12 Shakespeare 31:6,7,24 32:21 33:7 45:13 46:8 SHIAO 1:8 shirts 4:6 short 5:14,16 16:23,24 17:2 17:2,24 sickle 20:23 side 8:18 26:23 32:14 33:18 signature 41:23 significance 18:3 significant 6:1 24:25 50:23 significantly 11:8 signing 29:1 signs 14:19 similar 25:7 similarly 19:22 45:15 Simon 1:8 27:12 simple 38:12 simply 8:2 16:1 17:6 23:23 34:1 36:5 39:4 39:9 40:14 45:21 46:21 sincere 17:13 single 32:17 singled 13:20 sit 26:10 slander 35:2 37:17 38:1 slanders 37:13 slanted 27:19 Slants 3:15 4:16 9:2,11,15 16:22 17:4,5 27:15 28:25 29:8,9 40:16 43:18 45:23 48:25 slash 20:23 slogan 35:8 slur 17:16 26:17 39:19 slurs 9:8 39:19 small 44:23 Smith 33:4 Smith's 34:19 social 4:16 40:18 soft 11:17 Solicitor 1:18 solitude 46:19 somebody 7:8 13:18,19 23:6 33:6 somewhat 4:25 songs 4:18 Sorrell 44:14 sorry 7:4 12:1 sort 8:14 sorts 22:12 Sotomayor 26:6 28:13,22 30:1 30:4,11,13,16 32:16 37:1,3 37:12,22 sought 27:12,15 source 7:13 8:2 8:10,15,22 16:17 18:9,14 32:24 33:2,12 33:16 34:9 36:17 40:14 43:19,21 45:17 45:21,24 46:22 47:1,6 Soviet 20:23,25 21:1 space 10:4 speak 39:14 speaker 21:19 speaking 39:10 specific 35:1,21 specifically 18:1 28:10 39:23 speech 3:21 5:11 7:5 12:2 13:9 14:13 15:25 19:9 21:16,21 24:7 27:25 28:9,9,11 29:15 30:10 31:18 35:14 38:6,15 39:2 39:24 40:25 41:8,13 44:7 44:13 49:11,18 49:19,22 50:12 spirits 41:21 stand 15:13 standards 25:18 State 30:22 stated 13:16 statement 7:15 States 1:1,4,15 21:2 station 32:17,18 statute 5:5 6:7 21:6 24:10 25:20 27:21 28:15,18 47:15 statutory 3:10 22:3 23:1 39:5 step 23:15,22 Stewart 1:18 2:3 2:9 3:5,6,8,25 4:9,13 5:4 6:5 6:15 7:2,24 8:5 9:5,13 10:10 10:24 11:6,15 11:16 12:8 13:2,20 14:7 14:16 15:19,22 16:13 17:8,11 18:6 19:3,10 19:21,25 20:4 20:7,10,14 Alderson Reporting Company 21:11,20 22:19 22:24 23:14,20 23:25 24:11,13 25:16 26:8 47:17 48:14,16 48:18 50:11,19 stick 34:12 sting 17:9 Stinks 11:18 stop 34:14,17,18 34:22,25 stopped 30:17 stopping 28:24 28:25 29:2 stops 32:24 stretching 18:17 strict 24:10 striking 46:13 strong 15:3 stronger 33:8 struck 14:22 students 15:6,15 16:1 subject 3:18 12:4 14:14 21:17 29:8 submitted 51:2 51:4 substantial 4:23 4:24 30:24 suddenly 46:7 46:12 sue 6:2 29:5 30:11 49:1 sufficiently 25:21 suggest 37:6 suggesting 42:14 47:5 suggestion 47:13 suggestive 41:19 suggests 37:8 suit 6:7,11,16 22:13,21 suits 25:1 superior 9:2,11 9:12 Official - Subject to Final Review 61 suppose 9:1 15:5 27:16 46:6 supposed 42:12 suppress 20:19 21:4 24:18 suppression 49:17 Supreme 1:1,15 sure 9:22 44:3 surgeon 44:11 surprised 4:25 surprising 26:3 26:20 survive 42:15,19 42:20 sweeping 14:23 sweeps 20:14 21:6 symbol 17:15 20:25 symbols 3:13 19:24 50:24 system 29:17 26:15 42:4 terrible 20:3 test 24:13 44:1 49:9 50:7,9 Texas 39:20 Thank 3:8 27:6 27:10 41:9 48:12,13,18 51:1 theory 25:17 thief 37:15 thin 48:1 thing 9:7 16:10 22:23,25 26:4 26:22 33:5,5 34:9 48:7 49:4 49:8 things 4:13 8:24 10:18 12:14,15 12:23,24 13:23 15:14 20:12 25:12,12 26:5 26:9,9 32:21 38:7,10 39:19 T 41:15 46:10,13 T 2:1,1 48:24 50:15 take 9:3 10:1 think 3:25 7:2 24:12 25:13,24 7:24 9:5,7,13 28:3,5 40:21 10:3,10,10,12 45:7 13:24 16:19,20 taken 23:14 17:8 18:8,20 takes 17:9 19:3 20:15 talk 20:10 23:25 24:1,11 talking 16:9,10 24:11,13 26:11 18:21 40:20 28:3,20 33:19 45:14 33:20,23,25 talks 48:2 35:13,14 37:23 Tam 1:8 3:4 38:4 41:12,15 16:21 27:12 42:8 43:14 48:24 44:5,17,17 Tam's 17:13,19 45:3,18,19 targets 28:10 46:14 47:4,19 31:17 48:9,23 50:12 tee 4:6 thinking 7:18 tell 8:5 40:10 thinks 17:4 term 9:3,15 17:6 thought 12:3,25 terms 9:8 16:1 47:17 thousand 32:18 32:20 thousands 45:4 threats 38:7 three 4:13 48:19 tied 4:2 time 14:6 25:9 27:5 36:5,14 36:15,16,19,22 times 39:12 40:4 tiny 33:3 34:11 45:6 Title 6:16 today 27:14 32:20 topic 18:12 topics 15:7 trademark 1:5 6:14,17,18 7:4 7:13,14,17 8:2 8:21,22 10:5 11:5,8,18 14:9 16:11,13,16 17:11,13 20:13 20:21,22 21:4 22:1,5,7 23:2 23:13 24:23,24 25:2 26:1,2 27:21 28:18 29:3,4,17 30:22,25 31:15 31:23,25 33:12 33:16 34:15 35:8,12,25 37:16,17,24 40:6,11 41:5 41:17,25 42:12 43:13,15 44:21 45:21 46:10,20 49:12 50:21 trademark-rel... 45:12 trademarked 25:12 35:15 trademarks 6:25 7:25 8:9 9:21 10:14,18 16:14 18:4,6 18:13 23:11 26:24 28:1 34:14 40:8 41:8 50:1 traditional 5:19 29:15 traditionally 26:19 train 32:17,18 treat 41:7,7,8 treated 13:4 Trial 20:21 22:2 trouble 26:12 troubles 38:11 true 7:8 8:8 9:7 12:11 22:11 truly 49:17 Trump 37:14,15 trying 17:21 33:1 34:1 46:21 TTAB 20:20 turn 14:25 two 4:13 15:9 16:23 21:22 26:4,9,9 37:5 43:17 48:14,24 type 10:25 11:3 11:6,6,8,16 20:17 types 11:1 21:22 typical 39:1,9 typically 23:25 25:18 U U.S.C 3:11 6:8 Uh-huh 19:25 ultimate 7:12 unconstitutio... 5:7 16:5 24:20 36:13 37:9 41:3 understand 19:16 31:21 43:24 44:3 Alderson Reporting Company 46:3 unfair 6:18 22:21 Union 21:1,2 United 1:1,4,15 21:2 universe 36:19 university 15:5 16:10 unregistered 6:18 29:7 upheld 36:3 use 3:16 17:14 17:15,19 23:5 26:18 27:18 29:6 30:2,21 33:16 34:13,15 35:11 36:2,7 36:15,17 37:18 48:25 49:2,5 user 9:24 uses 8:19 utilize 31:13,16 V v 1:7 3:4 14:16 16:4 35:15 vagueness 25:11 valid 22:5,7 23:2 value 13:9 values 4:3 vanity 39:20 variety 24:25 vehicles 16:15 venerated 50:7 venue 16:9 view 4:7 27:2,22 28:14,17 36:11 41:3 viewpoint 12:6 13:1,5 14:15 17:1 19:11,13 21:5,19 24:16 25:10 38:14 44:6,12 viewpoint-bas... 13:14,16,24 Official - Subject to Final Review 62 14:24 15:13 16:6 19:19 20:6,16 21:9 viewpoint-neu... 42:3,7 viewpoints 32:13 45:12 views 4:8,16 25:24 28:12 29:22,25 violate 3:22 violence 45:2 virtuous 12:21 12:21 19:18 Vista 8:13 wide 12:9 widely 29:17 31:12 willing 21:15 wine 41:21 wishes 3:18 46:23 wonder 18:16 wonderful 19:23 20:2 word 17:4,10,14 17:19 25:13 words 5:14 7:6 8:19 11:10 13:11 16:24 26:18 34:8 W 35:9,12,22 want 9:17,22 36:2,7,9,16 10:22,24,25,25 42:23 50:24 13:24 19:14,15 work 4:11 24:7 31:5 32:8 worrying 46:5,6 32:8,19,21 wouldn't 4:11 33:2,4,23 29:9 44:16 36:20 41:4,7 write 5:24 33:3 43:10 44:25 45:1 wanted 12:16 wrong 11:13 wants 11:17,18 31:8 45:3,4 48:24,25 49:1 X Washington 1:11,19 x 1:2,10 way 4:19 8:1 Y 12:19,22 13:9 yeah 32:6 35:25 13:10 15:8,9 36:4 26:6,18 29:1,1 year 26:2 29:12,15 34:2 38:21 39:6 Z 40:10 45:16 46:25 49:2 0 ways 25:1 29:14 we'll 3:3 8:24 1 we're 11:1 14:7 10 33:8 14:8 18:25 10:07 1:16 3:2 36:1 38:8 1052 37:5,8 43:8 44:19 1052(a) 3:11 Wednesday 1:12 22:4 went 17:12 11:03 51:3 weren't 25:13 1125(a) 6:16 15 3:11 6:16 15-1293 1:6 3:4 17 6:8 18 1:12 1969 20:21 21:3 2 2 41:18 2017 1:12 27 2:7 3 3 2:4 300,000 26:1 4 411(a) 6:8 43 30:22 48 2:10 5 50,000 10:4 34:6 500 14:20 52(a)'s 3:19 6 7 8 9 99 10:18 Alderson Reporting Company