The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against a political activist's bid to trademark the phrase "Trump Too Small," affirming that the federal trademark office acted within its rights when it rejected the registration. Justice Clarence Thomas authored the opinion, backed by a unanimous court.
This case originated from a well-remembered exchange between then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and Florida GOP Senator Marco Rubio during the 2016 Republican primary. Rubio made a jest about the size of Trump's hands, to which Trump responded during a debate, defending the size of his hands. This banter led to widespread media coverage, including headlines like "Donald Trump defends size of his penis" from CNN and "Donald Trump Assures America He is Well-Endowed" from Vanity Fair.
In 2018, attorney Steve Elster attempted to trademark "Trump Too Small" for T-shirts, aiming to criticise Trump's policies through a double entendre referencing the earlier debate. However, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) refused registration under federal law, which prohibits registering a living person's name without consent. Elster argued that this refusal violated his First Amendment rights.
The case reached the Supreme Court, which ultimately upheld the USPTO's decision, emphasizing that Elster's freedom of speech wasn't infringed as he could still produce and sell the T-shirts. Justices Sotomayor and Thomas questioned whether Elster's speech was genuinely impeded.
This ruling aligns with recent Supreme Court decisions reinforcing First Amendment protections in trademark cases. In 2017, the Court supported Simon Tam, who sought to register the name "The Slants" for his band, and in 2019, it struck down a provision of the Lanham Act prohibiting the registration of "immoral" or "scandalous" trademarks.
Source:
https://www.cnn.com/Image:
https://allbluetees.com/
