33. In Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., the Supreme Court established that government
regulation of advertising ______.
a. may target messages contrary to its own views
b. may not engage in content-based, viewpoint discrimination
c. may not target messages it disfavored
d. may not engage in content-based, viewpoint discrimination and may not target
messages it disfavored
34. The Supreme Court has not heard cases involving offensive political advertising,
and the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal ______.
a. disagree on the test to use to determine the outcome of these cases
b. agree on the test to use to determine the outcome of these cases
c. agree that government may ban false, misleading, or profoundly offensive political
advertisements
d. also have not heard these cases
35. In deciding the false advertising suit brought by POM Wonderful against Coca-Cola,
the Supreme Court held that ______.
a. the Food and Drug Administration on product content labeling barred a Lanham Act
unfair competition lawsuit
b. the Lanham Act has no bearing on food and beverage labeling
c. the Food and Drug Administration on product content labeling barred a deceptive
labeling lawsuit
d. false and misleading labeling could be grounds for a lawsuit even when the labeling
met the Food and Drug Administration’s minimum content requirements
36. The Supreme Court’s commercial speech decisions in 2014 make clear that the
application of the commercial speech doctrine to corporate speech is ______.
a. stable
b. changing
c. clear
d. both stable and clear