American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Practice Exam

What principle did the Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego case establish regarding speech?

1. Commercial speech is treated differently than non-commercial speech

2. Both commercial and non-commercial speech cannot be treated differently

3. All forms of speech can be banned under certain conditions

4. Content-based signs must meet strict criteria for approval

The correct answer is: Both commercial and non-commercial speech cannot be treated differently

The principle established in the Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego case focuses on the treatment of different types of speech, specifically commercial versus non-commercial speech. The ruling clarified that both forms of speech should be afforded some level of protection under the First Amendment, emphasizing that the government cannot treat commercial speech more harshly than non-commercial speech without a substantial justification. This case highlighted the importance of protecting speech in public spaces, reinforcing the idea that distinctions made by government regulations must be reasonable and justified. The ruling signified a need for consistency in how various forms of speech are regulated, advocating against arbitrary distinctions that might favor one type of expression over another. In summary, the case set a critical precedent that all forms of speech, whether commercial or non-commercial, deserve protection, and that blanket prohibitions or overly restrictive measures may infringe on constitutional rights.