Michigan
How Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission applies in Michigan: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for First Amendment.
Michigan follows the Central Hudson framework for commercial speech by evaluating whether the speech is protected, whether the government interest is substantial, and whether the regulation directly advances that interest without being more extensive than necessary.
The specific rule applied in Michigan requires the state to justify restrictions on commercial speech by demonstrating that the regulation directly serves a substantial governmental interest and that there are no less restrictive means available.
The court held that restrictions on billboards constituted a violation of free speech, applying the Central Hudson framework to evaluate the regulation.
The court ruled that the regulation of advertising had to balance the government’s interest in aesthetics with the rights of expression, referencing the requirements of Central Hudson.
The Michigan Supreme Court found the advertisement restriction unconstitutional, reinforcing the strict scrutiny laid out in Central Hudson.
Michigan's application of the Central Hudson test is generally aligned with the federal standard, but the Michigan courts are increasingly cautious about imposing regulations that could unduly restrict commercial speech, arguably adopting a more protective stance.
Understanding the application of Central Hudson is crucial for the Michigan bar exam, especially in sections addressing First Amendment issues and commercial speech rights.