OPATZ

v.

CITY OF ST. CLOUD ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (17 total)

• Va. State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Va. Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748 (U.S. 1976)
  …. S. 934 (1972). Finally, the special problems of the electronic broadcast media are likewise not in this case. Cf. Capitol Broadcasting Co. v. Mitchell, 333 F. Supp. 582 (DC 1971), aff’d sub nom. Capitol Broadcasting Co. v. Acting Attorney General, 405 U. S. 1000 (1972). What is at issue is whether a State may completely suppress the dissemination of concededly truthful information about entirely lawful activity, fearful of that information’s effect upon its disseminators and its recipients. Reserving other…
• Bates v. State Bar of Ariz., 433 U.S. 350 (U.S. 1977)
  …special problems of advertising on the electronic broadcast media will warrant special consideration. Cf. Capital Broadcasting Co. v. Mitchell, 333 F. Supp. 582 (DC 1971), summarily aff’d sub nom. Capital Broadcasting Co. v. Acting Attorney General, 405 U. S. 1000 (1972). The constitutional issue in this case is only whether the State may prevent the publication in a newspaper of appellants’ truthful advertisement concerning the availability and terms of routine legal services. We rule simply that the flow o…
• Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n v. Pacifica Found., 438 U.S. 726 (U.S. 1978)
  …atic National Committee, 412 U. S. 94, 101 (1973); Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 395 U. S. 367, 386-387 (1969); Capital Broadcasting Co. v. Mitchell, 333 F. Supp. 582 (DC 1971), aff’d sub nom. Capital Broadcasting Co. v. Acting Attorney General, 405 U. S. 1000 (1972); see generally Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343 U. S. 495, 502-503 (1952). In my view, the Commission was entitled to give substantial weight to this difference in reaching its decision in this case. A second difference, not without relev…