Nike, Inc., et al. v. Marc Kasky (539 U.S. 654)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 26, 2003 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 539 U.S. 654 · 123 S. Ct. 2554
- Decided
- June 26, 2003
- Term
- October Term 2002
- Vote
- 6–3
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Petition denied or appeal dismissed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Breyer, with whom Justice O’Connor joins, dissenting. During the 1990’s, human rights and labor groups, newspaper editorial writers, and others severely criticized the Nike corporation for its alleged involvement in disreputable labor practices abroad. See Lodging of Petitioners 7-8, 96-118, 127-162, 232-235, 272-273. This case focuses upon whether, and to what extent, the First Amendment protects certain efforts by Nike to respond — efforts that took the form of written communications in which Nike explained or denied many of the charges made. The case arises under provisions of California law that authorize a private individual, acting as a “private attorney general,” effectively to prosecute a business for unfair competition or false advertising. Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code Ann. §§ 17200, 17204, 17500, 17535 (West 1997). The respondent, Marc Kasky, has claimed that Nike made false or misleading commercial statements. And he bases this claim upon statements that Nike made in nine specific documents, including press releases and letters to the editor of a newspaper, to institutional customers, and to representatives of nongovernmental organizations. Brief for Respondent 5. The California Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal of Kasky’s complaint without leave to amend on the ground that *666 “the record discloses noncommercial speech, addressed to a topic of public interest…
Excerpt of a 37,941-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.