Missouri
How Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission applies in Missouri: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for First Amendment.
Missouri applies the principles of 'Central Hudson' by evaluating commercial speech regulations under a similar four-part test assessing whether the speech is lawful and not misleading, if a substantial government interest is asserted, if the regulation directly advances that interest, and if it is not more extensive than necessary. Missouri courts have generally followed federal precedent in commercial speech cases, with minor state-specific adaptations.
In Missouri, the state follows the Central Hudson test, determining the constitutionality of restrictions on commercial speech by assessing the speech's legality, government interests, and the fit between the restriction and the interest.
The court upheld a regulation on advertising that was found to mislead consumers, applying the Central Hudson framework to determine that the restriction served a significant governmental interest in consumer protection.
Missouri courts ruled that advertising regulations must meet the Central Hudson criteria, emphasizing that the regulation of commercial speech must be both necessary and tailored to serve a legitimate governmental interest.
Here, the court struck down an advertisement restriction as overly broad under the Central Hudson test, reinforcing the necessity for precise alignment between restrictions and governmental objectives.
Missouri's approach closely mirrors the federal standard established in Central Hudson, maintaining the four-part test for evaluating commercial speech restrictions. However, Missouri may apply additional scrutiny based on state interests or consumer protection laws that reflect local priorities.
Knowledge of how Missouri applies the Central Hudson test could be vital for the Missouri bar exam, especially in questions relating to commercial speech and First Amendment protections.