 |
      |
 |
|
|
Supreme Court of the United States
| In a briefing
before the Supreme Court of the United States, Boycott Watch was prominently
mentioned in the filings of the Pacific Legal Foundation. The case, Nike, Inc.,
et al., V. Marc Kasky, the Pacific Legal Foundation, based in Sacramento,
California, filed a briefing is support of Nike, Inc. as the petitioners.
The questions presented to the Supreme Court were in regard to a California Supreme Court ruling regarding the First Amendment freedom of speech rights and how it applies to corporate speech. One of the main points of the Pacific Legal Foundation is that corporate speech should enjoy the same full free speech protection as granted under the United States Constitution to individuals. Boycott Watch acknowledges that freedom of speech is vital to a free society, no matter where it comes from. As the brief states "…by permitting restrictions on commercial speech, the court assumes that consumers are unable to separate the wheat from the chaff." Boycott Watch was founded on the premise that consumers need to have as much information as possible, and information on both sides of consumer issues, to be able to come to their own conclusion of what the truth is. Under this same section of the briefing, Boycott Watch was mentioned as follows: "Boycotting is such a popular response to corporate speech that an organization called 'Boycott Watch' keeps track of all the major boycott actions. See www.boycottwatch.org." Boycott Watch thanks the Pacific Legal Foundation for mentioning Boycott Watch in the briefing. Fred Taub, Executive Director of Boycott Watch thanked the Pacific Legal Foundation saying "We are very pleased to see our work recognized and Boycott Watch listed in the briefing under the 'Table of Authorities.' Boycott Watch is a leading authority on consumer boycotts and will continue to use our First Amendment rights to champion the rights of consumers who wish to learn the full story from an unbiased source presenting both sides of the story. Our goal is to report the facts so consumers can decide for themselves what the truth is. The Pacific Legal Foundation mention of Boycott Watch in an Amicus Curiae briefing to the USSC further establishes that Boycott Watch is not only a vital and highly respected organization, but a vital consumer source as well." |
|
 |