Valentine v. Chrestensen

Respondent F. J. Chrestensen was the owner of the USS S-49, a World War I submarine that he had moored at a State pier on the East River in New York City. Chrestensen attempted to distribute handbills that advertised his exhibition and solicited visitors for an admission fee, a violation of a municipal ordinance (Section 318 of the Sanitary Code) prohibiting the distribution of printed handbills in the streets bearing "commercial advertising matter".

The Police Commissioner of New York City, Lewis J. Valentine, warned Chrestensen of the violation and informed him that only the distribution of handbills solely devoted to "information or a public protest" was permitted. Accordingly, Chrestensen remade his handbill by removing the admission fee from the front side and placing on the reverse a protest against the City Dock Department's refusal to grant his submarine dockage. The Police Department nevertheless prohibited distribution of the new handbill on grounds that the front side retained commercial advertising content, even without statement of an admission fee. Chrestensen, alleging loss in the excess of $4,000 ({{Inflation|US|4000|1942|fmt=eq|r=-3}}), sued under Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. A divided Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in his favor,{{cite court |litigants=Chrestensen v. Valentine |vol=122 |reporter=F.2d |opinion=511 |court=2d Cir. |date=1941 |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/122/511/1542171/ |access-date=2018-01-25 }} and Valentine petitioned to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court reversed the Second Circuit's ruling, finding that, although states and municipalities may not unduly burden free expression in the streets, the Constitution did not prevent the government from regulating purely commercial advertising. Writing for the majority, Associate Justice Owen Roberts held that it was the prerogative of the legislature to determine whether an activity interfered with the full and free public use of the streets, and thus the presence and extent of commercial activity was a matter reserved for legislative judgement. The Court found in addition that Chrestensen's affixing of the protest to his handbill was done with the sole intent of evading the municipal ordinance and therefore did not permit his distribution of the handbill.

Valentine was the first major case to address the limits of "commercial speech",{{cite news|last1=Olive|first1=S.M.|title=Timeline of commercial speech cases|url=http://www.capitalismcenter.org/Advocacy/Speech/Timeline.htm|access-date=26 January 2018|work=The Center for the Advancement of Capitalism}} but it was later "abruptly" overturned by Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (1976).{{cite journal|last1=Morrison|first1=Alan B.|title=How We Got the Commercial Speech Doctrine: An Originalist's Recollections|journal=Case Western Reserve Law Review|date=2004|volume=54|issue=4|page=1189|url=https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1558&context=caselrev|access-date=26 January 2018}}

{{Reflist}}

• {{cite journal |first=Donald |last=Meiklejohn |title=Commercial Speech and the First Amendment |journal=California Western Law Review |volume=13 |pages=430 |year=1977 }}
• {{cite journal |first=Aaron S. |last=Resnik |title=Freedom of Speech and Commercial Solicitation |journal=California Law Review |volume=30 |issue=6 |year=1942 |pages=655–662 |doi=10.2307/3477168 |jstor=3477168 |url=https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/1109119/files/fulltext.pdf }}

• {{wikisource-inline}}
• {{caselaw source

|case=Valentine v. Chrestensen, {{ussc|316|52|1942|el=no}}

| cornell =https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/316/52

| courtlistener =https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/103654/valentine-v-chrestensen/

| findlaw = http://laws.findlaw.com/us/316/52.html

| googlescholar = https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14755001745453098209

| justia =https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/316/52/case.html

| openjurist =https://openjurist.org/316/us/52

| loc =http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep316/usrep316052/usrep316052.pdf

}}

• The handbill leading to the litigation, http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1158&context=historical
• Transcript of record, http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1159&context=historical

{{US1stAmendment Freedom of Speech Clause Supreme Court case law|state=collapsed}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Valentine V. Chrestensen}}

Category:United States Supreme Court cases in 1942

Category:United States Supreme Court cases

Category:United States Free Speech Clause case law

Category:United States commercial speech case law

Category:Overruled United States Supreme Court decisions

Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Stone Court

Category:History of New York City

Category:April 1942 in the United States