Arce v. The Ensign Group, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a ban on outdoor advertising of smokeless tobacco and cigars within one thousand feet of a school or playground violated the First Amendment
• holding that challenged ordinances can be justified based on history, consensus, and simple common sense
• noting that the “framework for analyzing regulations of commercial speech ... is ‘substantially similar’ to the test for time, place, and manner restrictions”
• recognizing that, in some cases, restrictions on constitutional rights may be justified “based solely on history, consensus, and ‘simple common sense’” (quoting Florida Bar v. Went For It, Inc., 515 U.S. 618, 628 (1995))
• holding that the Labeling Act preempts state regulations specifically targeting cigarette advertising, but does not preempt state regulation of cigarette use or sales, or imposition of regulations of general applicability, such as zoning, which may have an effect on cigarette advertising
• holding that the PHCSA preempts state limits on advertising to minors

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).