Watchdog Group Files Amicus Brief Blasting Commercial Speech Restrictions

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Kara Zupkus (224) 456-0257

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance Foundation (TPAF) filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari in Council for Responsible Nutrition v. James, a case challenging a New York law that restricts the sale of certain dietary supplements to minors based solely on how those products are marketed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the statute, applying a watered-down version of the longstanding legal standard for commercial speech, commonly known as the “Central Hudson test,” first established in the 1980 Supreme Court case Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission.

TPAF Executive Director Ross Marchand offered the following comment:

“This New York law is a direct assault on the First Amendment and undermines the principle that the government cannot ban commercial speech on a whim. For decades, the Supreme Court has made clear that truthful marketing plays a vital role in informing consumers and supporting a vibrant market economy. By allowing New York to bypass these protections, the Second Circuit effectively replaced meaningful constitutional scrutiny with a rubber stamp for government overreach.

“This statute has nothing to do with protecting minors. Instead of regulating specific ingredients or demonstrable harms, New York has chosen to outlaw marketing suggesting that people benefit from the targeted products—even when they do. That sets a dangerous precedent. If governments can suppress speech whenever they dislike a product, no industry or company is safe. Consumers also suffer when speech is restricted. Brazen speech-based restrictions demand rigorous judicial scrutiny, not deference.

“The economic implications are just as troubling. Free enterprise depends on the ability of businesses to communicate truthful information about their products. By recklessly restricting marketing, this law hampers markets, limits consumer choice, and disadvantages responsible companies that rely on clear and accurate labeling. It invites arbitrary enforcement and tilts the playing field toward politically favored outcomes rather than consumer-driven decisions. TPAF urges the Supreme Court to take this case and reaffirm critical protections for commercial speech.”

###

The Taxpayers Protection Alliance Foundation (TPAF) is a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to educating the public through research, investigative reporting, and analysis about the effects of excessive taxation and spending by all levels of government.