KIERNAN ET AL.

v.

LINDSAY, MAYOR OF NEW YORK, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• 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…
• Lamar Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Miss. State TAX Comm'n, 701 F.2d 314 (5th Cir. 1983)
  …have hazardous potential; ropes, automobiles and shotguns are familiar examples. In support of this argument, appellants rely principally11 on Capital Broadcasting [*325] Co. v. Mitchell, 333 P.Supp. 582 (D.D.C.1971) (three-judge court), aff’d mem. 405 U.S. 1000, 92 S.Ct. 1289, 31 L.Ed.2d 472 (1972). The three-judge district court in that case upheld a nationwide ban of cigarette advertising on television and radio: Whether the Act is viewed as an exercise of the Congress’ supervisory role over the federal…
• Mylett v. Mullican, 992 F.2d 1347 (5th Cir. 1993)
  …), indeed, not all forms of speech receive the full panoply of protections available to others. E.g., Capital Broadcasting Co. v. Mitchell, 333 F.Supp. 582 (D.D.C.1971), aff'd without op. sub nom. Capital Broadcasting Co. v. Acting Attorney General, 405 U.S. 1000, 1000, 92 S.Ct. 1289, 1290, 31 L.Ed.2d 472 (1972) (commercial speech). Speech by a public employee, as an employee, on a matter purely of private concern falls outside the protective radius of the first amendment. Wilson, supra; Caine v. Hardy, 943…