Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Willingboro
Encyclopedia
Linmark Associates, Inc., v. Township of Willingboro, 431 U.S. 85
(1977), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
found that an ordinance
prohibiting the posting of "for sale" and "sold" signs on real estate
within the town violated the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution
protections for commercial speech
.
, New Jersey
, had been experiencing a shift in its demographics during the 1960s as the proportion of its non-white population increased from less than 1% to 18.2% in 1973. Concerned that white flight
might occur, it enacted an ordinance in 1974 that prohibited its residents from having a "for sale" or "sold" sign on any real estate within the township. During the 1960s and 1970s, many communities in the United States had enacted similar laws in response to the practices of blockbusting
. It was believed that by preventing the posting of these signs, residents would not know if a large number of white homeowners were attempting to sell their houses and move from the township at the same time. The intent of such laws was to prevent panic selling
and to allow integration
in a more gradual manner.
Linmark Associates owned property that was for sale when the ordinance was passed, and filed suit in federal district court
seeking declaratory and injunctive
relief. The district court granted a declaration of unconstitutionality of the ordinance, but on appeal a divided Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
reversed the decision of the district court. The case was then appealed to the Supreme Court.
, 425 U.S. 748 (1976), which struck down a statute forbidding the advertisement of prescription drug prices. Justice Marshall's decision noted that the Willingboro ordinance did not genuinely regulate the time or manner of the communication, but its content, since other signs were permitted. Rather, Willingboro proscribed particular signs, those stating "for sale" or "sold," because the township feared that the signs will cause those residents reading them to act upon them. As such, the township's ordinance was essentially the same as the situation in Virginia State Pharmacy Board, where a statute was intended to keep information from the public. Although the purpose of the Willingboro law was to prevent irrational decisionmaking by white homeowners by keeping information on the status of real estate from them, the First Amendment does not permit the government to make such a statute. The opinion says that when there is a choice between suppressing information and the danger of its misuse if it is freely available, then the remedy under the First Amendment is more speech and not enforced silence. As there was no meaningful difference between the township's ordinance and the statute overturned in the Virginia State Pharmacy Board case, the Court concluded that the Willingboro violated the First Amendment.
Justice Rehnquist did not participate in the decision. His had been the lone dissenting opinion in the Virginia State Pharmacy Board case, stating that the free speech protection of the First Amendment should be limited to social and political issues.
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
(1977), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
found that an ordinance
Local ordinance
A local ordinance is a law usually found in a municipal code.-United States:In the United States, these laws are enforced locally in addition to state law and federal law.-Japan:...
prohibiting the posting of "for sale" and "sold" signs on real estate
Real estate
In general use, esp. North American, 'real estate' is taken to mean "Property consisting of land and the buildings on it, along with its natural resources such as crops, minerals, or water; immovable property of this nature; an interest vested in this; an item of real property; buildings or...
within the town violated the First Amendment
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering...
to the United States Constitution
United States Constitution
The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States of America. It is the framework for the organization of the United States government and for the relationship of the federal government with the states, citizens, and all people within the United States.The first three...
protections for commercial speech
Commercial speech
Commercial Speech is speech done on behalf of a company or individual for the intent of making a profit. It is economic in nature and usually has the intent of convincing the audience to partake in a particular action, often purchasing a specific product...
.
Background
Willingboro TownshipWillingboro Township, New Jersey
Willingboro is a Township in Burlington County, New Jersey, United States and a suburb of Philadelphia. As of the United States 2010 Census, the township population was 31,629....
, New Jersey
New Jersey
New Jersey is a state in the Northeastern and Middle Atlantic regions of the United States. , its population was 8,791,894. It is bordered on the north and east by the state of New York, on the southeast and south by the Atlantic Ocean, on the west by Pennsylvania and on the southwest by Delaware...
, had been experiencing a shift in its demographics during the 1960s as the proportion of its non-white population increased from less than 1% to 18.2% in 1973. Concerned that white flight
White flight
White flight has been a term that originated in the United States, starting in the mid-20th century, and applied to the large-scale migration of whites of various European ancestries from racially mixed urban regions to more racially homogeneous suburban or exurban regions. It was first seen as...
might occur, it enacted an ordinance in 1974 that prohibited its residents from having a "for sale" or "sold" sign on any real estate within the township. During the 1960s and 1970s, many communities in the United States had enacted similar laws in response to the practices of blockbusting
Blockbusting
Blockbusting is a business practice of U.S. real estate agents and building developers meant to encourage white property owners to sell their houses at a loss, by implying that racial, ethnic, or religious minorities — Blacks, Hispanics, Jews et al. — were moving into their previously racially...
. It was believed that by preventing the posting of these signs, residents would not know if a large number of white homeowners were attempting to sell their houses and move from the township at the same time. The intent of such laws was to prevent panic selling
Panic selling
Panic selling is a wide-scale selling of an investment, in order to get out of an investment . The main problem is that investors react simply out of emotion and fear, without evaluating the fundamentals. Almost all market crashes are caused by panic selling. Most major stock exchanges use trading...
and to allow integration
Racial integration
Racial integration, or simply integration includes desegregation . In addition to desegregation, integration includes goals such as leveling barriers to association, creating equal opportunity regardless of race, and the development of a culture that draws on diverse traditions, rather than merely...
in a more gradual manner.
Linmark Associates owned property that was for sale when the ordinance was passed, and filed suit in federal district court
United States district court
The United States district courts are the general trial courts of the United States federal court system. Both civil and criminal cases are filed in the district court, which is a court of law, equity, and admiralty. There is a United States bankruptcy court associated with each United States...
seeking declaratory and injunctive
Injunction
An injunction is an equitable remedy in the form of a court order that requires a party to do or refrain from doing certain acts. A party that fails to comply with an injunction faces criminal or civil penalties and may have to pay damages or accept sanctions...
relief. The district court granted a declaration of unconstitutionality of the ordinance, but on appeal a divided Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts for the following districts:* District of Delaware* District of New Jersey...
reversed the decision of the district court. The case was then appealed to the Supreme Court.
Court's Decision
The Supreme Court had recently recognized that commercial speech had some protection in Bigelow v. Virginia, 421 U.S. 809 (1975), in which the Court struck down a Virginia statute prohibiting the advertisement of out-of-state abortion procedures, and in Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer CouncilVirginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council
Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 , was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a state could not limit pharmacists’ right to provide information about prescription drug prices...
, 425 U.S. 748 (1976), which struck down a statute forbidding the advertisement of prescription drug prices. Justice Marshall's decision noted that the Willingboro ordinance did not genuinely regulate the time or manner of the communication, but its content, since other signs were permitted. Rather, Willingboro proscribed particular signs, those stating "for sale" or "sold," because the township feared that the signs will cause those residents reading them to act upon them. As such, the township's ordinance was essentially the same as the situation in Virginia State Pharmacy Board, where a statute was intended to keep information from the public. Although the purpose of the Willingboro law was to prevent irrational decisionmaking by white homeowners by keeping information on the status of real estate from them, the First Amendment does not permit the government to make such a statute. The opinion says that when there is a choice between suppressing information and the danger of its misuse if it is freely available, then the remedy under the First Amendment is more speech and not enforced silence. As there was no meaningful difference between the township's ordinance and the statute overturned in the Virginia State Pharmacy Board case, the Court concluded that the Willingboro violated the First Amendment.
Justice Rehnquist did not participate in the decision. His had been the lone dissenting opinion in the Virginia State Pharmacy Board case, stating that the free speech protection of the First Amendment should be limited to social and political issues.