Simon Tam named his band The Slants “to make a statement about racial and cultural issues”. Now he’s the front man for the First Amendment before the United States Supreme Court with his first gig on January 18.
How’d that happen?
Mr. Tam’s application to register his trademark was rejected because it “consists [of] matter which may disparage” people. That particular section of the Lanham Act doesn’t come up very often. Its most famous use to date was to de-register the Redskins trademarks.
Now Mr. Tam is fighting the Trademark Office and this law.
The First Amendment prohibits the government from regulating speech because of its content or the message conveyed. This isn’t like the government saying you can’t have a march because there’s already another group having a march in the same place that day. This is the government saying you can’t have a march because some people don’t like what you’re marching about.
That’s the very essence of the First Amendment. The government can’t stop us from speaking because it doesn’t like what we’re saying.
The courts recognize that invalidating the disparagement clause “may lead to wider registration of marks that offend vulnerable communities.” If the Supreme Court rules for Mr. Tam, the Redskins will also be allowed to register.
But, there’s no need to protect popular or harmless speech. It’s speech on the edge that needs protection “to ensure that we do not stifle public debate.”
That’s why the “First Amendment [should protect] Mr. Tam’s speech . . ..”
 Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443, 461 (2011)