BIGELOW V VIRGINIA 421 U.S 809 1975 BIGELOW V VIRGINIA U.S CONSTITUTION U.S GOV'T JUDICIAL BUSINESS/COMMERCE U.S GOVERNMENT AND CONSTITUTION SIGNIFICANCE THIS DECISION GAVE INCREASED FREEDOM OF PRESS RIGHTS UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO SOME COMMERCIAL SPEECH CONTAINED IN ADVERTISEMENTS BACKGROUND JEFFREY C BIGELOW WAS THE EDITOR OF THE VIRGINIA WEEKLY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA IN FEBRUARY 1971 THAT NEWSPAPER PRINTED AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR THE WOMEN'S PAVILION A NEW YORK CITY BUSINESS THAT HELPED WOMEN LOCATE ABORTION SERVICES VIRGINIA LATER PROSECUTED BIGELOW FOR VIOLATING A STATE LAW THAT MADE IT ILLEGAL TO ENCOURAGE THE OBTAINING OF ABORTIONS BIGELOW ARGUED THAT THIS LAW VIOLATED THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AS GUARANTEED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT THE VIRGINIA COURTS RULED AGAINST BIGELOW WHO APPEALED TO THE U.S SUPREME COURT DECISION THIS CASE WAS ARGUED ON DECEMBER 18 1974 AND DECIDED ON JUNE 16 1975 BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 2 JUSTICE HARRY BLACKMUN SPOKE FOR THE COURT WHICH RULED IN FAVOR OF BIGELOW JUSTICES WILLIAM REHNQUIST AND BYRON WHITE DISSENTED THE COURT WHICH IN 1942 HAD RULED THAT COMMERCIAL SPEECH WAS NOT PROTECTED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION MANY OF THE RULINGS IT HAD MADE SINCE THEN THAT HAD EXPANDED FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS IN ADDITION IT ALSO TOOK INTO ACCOUNT ITS DECISION IN ROE V WADE 1973 WHICH GAVE WOMEN THE RIGHT TO ABORTION ON A CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS THE COURT DID RULE HOWEVER THAT AN ADVERTISEMENT SHOULD RECEIVE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION ONLY IF IT PROVIDED THE PUBLIC WITH ACCURATE INFORMATION ABOUT A SUBJECT OF CONSIDERABLE COMMUNITY INTEREST EXCERPT FROM THE OPINION OF THE COURT ADVERTISING LIKE ALL PUBLIC EXPRESSION MAY BE SUBJECT TO REASONABLE REGULATION THAT SERVES A LEGITIMATE PUBLIC INTEREST TO THE EXTENT THAT COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY IS SUBJECT TO REGULATION THE RELATIONSHIP OF SPEECH TO THAT ACTIVITY MAY BE ONE FACTOR AMONG OTHERS TO BE CONSIDERED IN WEIGHING THE FIRST AMENDMENT INTEREST AGAINST THE GOVERNMENTAL INTEREST ALLEGED ADVERTISING IS NOT THEREBY STRIPPED OF ALL FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION THE RELATIONSHIP OF SPEECH TO THE MARKETPLACE OF PRODUCTS OR OF SERVICES DOES NOT MAKE IT VALUELESS IN THE MARKETPLACE OF IDEAS
