Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Trademark for 'Trump Too Small': A Balance Between Free Speech and Trademark Law

Washington D.C., District of Columbia United States of America
Elster argued that this decision violated his free speech rights, but all nine justices disagreed
The denial of Elster’s trademark application does not prevent him from making or selling 'Trump Too Small' merchandise
The Supreme Court upheld the USPTO's denial of a trademark application for 'Trump Too Small'
`Trump Too Small' originated from an exchange between Trump and Sen. Marco Rubio during the 2016 Republican presidential nomination race
Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Trademark for 'Trump Too Small': A Balance Between Free Speech and Trademark Law

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court rejected an attempt by California lawyer Steve Elster to trademark the phrase 'Trump Too Small' for use on merchandise criticizing former President Donald Trump. The court upheld the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) denial of Elster's application due to a law prohibiting trademarks that use the names of living people without their consent.

The phrase 'Trump Too Small' originated from an exchange between Trump and Sen. Marco Rubio during the 2016 Republican presidential nomination race. Rubio mocked Trump's hand size, and Trump responded by defending his hands during a debate.

Elster argued that this decision violated his free speech rights, but all nine justices disagreed using differing rationales. The court emphasized the long-standing tradition of allowing individuals control over trademark-type protections related to their names.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion, stating that a tradition of restricting the trademarking of names has coexisted with the First Amendment. He noted that this history and tradition is sufficient to conclude that the restriction on Elster's application is compatible with the First Amendment.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett concurred, but she saw less relevance to the history. She believed that even without it, the restriction passes constitutional muster as a content-based, viewpoint-neutral trademark restriction.

The denial of Elster's trademark application does not prevent him from making or selling 'Trump Too Small' merchandise. Other individuals can also create and sell similar items without any legal restrictions.

This case is significant as it deals with the balance between free speech rights and trademark law, particularly when it comes to using the names of living individuals in commercial contexts.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

100%

No Doubts Found At Time Of Publication

Sources

100%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Supreme Court rejects attempt to trademark ‘Trump Too Small’

The Fixing Site: A Summary of the Article. Justin Jouvenal, Thursday, 13 June 2024 14:36
  • Unique Points
    • The Supreme Court rejected a California lawyer's attempt to trademark the phrase ‘Trump Too Small’ for use on T-shirts criticizing former president Donald Trump.
    • Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the unanimous decision, stating that a tradition of restricting the trademarking of names has coexisted with the First Amendment.
    • Elster came up with the idea for a ‘Trump Too Small’ T-shirt after Trump dismissed him as ‘Little Marco’ during the 2016 Republican presidential nomination race.
    • Trump responded by making a remark about the size of his hands during a televised debate, leading to Elster’s trademark application.
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Fallacies (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

100%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Supreme Court rejects ‘Trump Too Small’ trademark

CNN News Site: In-Depth Reporting and Analysis with Some Financial Conflicts and Sensational Language Devan Cole, Thursday, 13 June 2024 14:15
  • Unique Points
    • The Supreme Court rejected an attempt to trademark the phrase ‘Trump Too Small.’
    • Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion for a unanimous court.
    • Two years later, attorney Steve Elster sought to register ‘Trump Too Small’ as a trademark for use on T-shirts.
    • The US Patent and Trademark Office refused registration because the use of the name ‘Trump’ would be construed by the public as a reference to the former president.
    • Elster appealed to the USPTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, which also refused registration. A federal appeals court later held that the refusal violated Elster’s First Amendment rights.
    • Justice Amy Coney Barrett agreed with the court’s decision but not its reasoning.
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Fallacies (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

91%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Amy Coney Barrett Calls Out Clarence Thomas

Newsweek LLC Nick Mordowanec Thursday, 13 June 2024 16:54
  • Unique Points
    • Amy Coney Barrett refuted an argument made by Justice Clarence Thomas in a unanimous ruling.
    • The case involved petitioner Steve Elster wanting to register the phrase 'Trump Too Small' for use on T-shirts.
  • Accuracy
    • U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett refuted an argument made by fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas as part of a unanimous ruling
    • Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the unanimous decision, stating that a tradition of restricting the trademarking of names has coexisted with the First Amendment
  • Deception (80%)
    The article contains selective reporting as the author only mentions certain parts of the Supreme Court ruling that support his position and ignores other parts. The author also uses emotional manipulation by implying that Justice Thomas' argument is incorrect and needs to be refuted, creating a sense of urgency and importance around the issue.
    • The author only mentions certain parts of the Supreme Court ruling that support his position and ignores other parts.
    • The author uses emotional manipulation by implying that Justice Thomas' argument is incorrect and needs to be refuted.
  • Fallacies (95%)
    Justice Coney Barrett challenged Justice Thomas's use of historical analogies to establish the constitutionality of the names clause in trademark law. She argued that his reasoning ignored her reasons for drawing the analogy and that historical counterexamples complicate the argument. This is an example of a fallacy called 'Misquoting or Misrepresenting an Opponent's Argument'.
    • ]Justice Thomas mistakenly suggests that I present the federal trademark register as a limited public forum. That is not my position. Rather, I view the content-based nature of the limited public forum as analogous to the trademark registration system.[/
    • Justice Thomas ignores my reasons for drawing the analogy.
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

100%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Shirt mocking the size of Trump's — ahem — hands cannot be trademarked, Supreme Court rules

Politico News Site Name: POLITICO Full Legal Name of News Site: Politico LLC Location of News Site: Washington D.C., USA Thursday, 13 June 2024 00:00
  • Unique Points
    • California lawyer Steve Elster sought trademark protection for 'TRUMP TOO SMALL' merchandise
    • The Supreme Court denied Elster’s application due to a law prohibiting trademarks that use the names of living people without their consent
    • The phrase originated from an exchange between Trump and Sen. Marco Rubio during the 2016 Republican presidential nomination race where Trump mocked Rubio’s hand size and Rubio responded with a similar taunt
    • Trump defended the size of his hands during a debate in response to this taunt
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Fallacies (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

100%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Supreme Court rules California man can’t trademark ‘Trump too small’

The Boston Globe Thursday, 13 June 2024 00:00
  • Unique Points
    • The Supreme Court unanimously ruled against a man named Steve Elster who wanted to trademark the phrase ‘Trump too small’.
    • The decision was based on the fact that Trump had not given written consent for the use of his name in the trademark request.
    • Elster’s lawyers argued that this decision violated his free speech rights, but all nine justices disagreed using differing rationales.
    • The phrase ‘Trump too small’ is a reference to an exchange between Trump and Marco Rubio during the 2016 presidential campaign where Rubio called Trump out for having small hands.
    • The Supreme Court has previously struck down provisions of federal law denying trademarks seen as scandalous or immoral, but this case dealt with a measure calling for a trademark request to be refused if it involves a name, portrait or signature identifying a particular living individual unless the person has given written consent.
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Fallacies (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication