CINCINNATI v. DISCOVERY NETWORK, INC.

Legal Principle at Issue

Whether a city ordinance prohibiting the distribution of commercial flyers from news racks on city-owned property violates the First Amendment.

Action

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals and held that the city’s ordinance was unconstitutional.

Facts/Syllabus

In 1989, petitioner City of Cincinnati authorized respondent Discovery Network to place 62 freestanding newsracks on public property for the purpose of distributing free magazines that consisted primarily of advertisements for respondents' services. In 1990, motivated by its interest in the safety and attractive appearance of its streets and sidewalks, the city revoked respondents' permits on the ground that the magazines were "commercial handbill[s]," whose distribution on public property was prohibited by a pre-existing ordinance. 

In respondents' ensuing lawsuit, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio concluded that this categorical ban violated the First Amendment under the "reasonable fit" standard applied to the regulation of commercial speech in Board of Trustees of State University of N. Y. v. Fox (1989). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed.

Importance of Case

The Court affirmed that, while commercial speech maintains less protections, the government must have a reasonable fit between its justifiable aims and the means by which they accomplish those aims.