Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations — Quick Summary

Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations

413 U.S. 376 (1973)

In Brief

The case of Pittsburgh Press Co. v.

Key Issue

Whether the Pittsburgh Press Co.'s practice of separating employment advertisements by gender can be regulated under the First Amendment as commercial speech.

The Rule

Commercial speech, defined as speech that proposes a commercial transaction, is afforded less protection under the First Amendment compared to other categories of speech and can be regulated to advance substantial governmental interests, such as preventing discrimination.

Bottom Line

The United States Supreme Court held that the Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations could constitutionally prohibit the discriminatory advertising practices used by the Pittsburgh Press Co. as the advertisements were considered commercial speech, which is subject to regulation.

Why It Matters

Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Human Relations Commission is significant for law students as it marks a key point in delineating the scope and limits of the commercial speech doctrine. It underscores the Courts' approach to balancing First Amendment protections with the need to curtail practices deemed harmful to societal interests, in this case, gender discrimination. This case demonstrates how commercial speech may be lawfully restricted to advance important policy considerations, setting a precedent for similar regulatory efforts.

Master More First Amendment Cases with Briefly

Get AI-powered case briefs, practice questions, and study tools to excel in your law studies.