Supreme Court to consider whether ‘Trump Too Small’ can be trademarked without ex-president’s permission

CNN ^ | 11-01-2023 | Devan Cole

[Responsibility2nd]

 

A political activist’s desire to register a suggestive phrase targeting Donald Trump’s anatomy and policies is at the center of a Supreme Court case being heard Wednesday that will test the limits of the First Amendment.

Trump is not a party to the case, but his name will likely be tossed around constantly during oral arguments as the justices weigh whether a federal trademark statute that prevented the activist from registering “Trump Too Small” as a slogan for t-shirts without the former president’s explicit permission runs afoul of the First Amendment.

“The mark criticizes Trump by using a double entendre, invoking a widely publicized exchange from a 2016 Republican primary debate in which Trump commented about his anatomy, while also expressing Elster’s view about ‘the smallness of Donald Trump’s overall approach to governing as president of the United States,’” attorneys for the activist, Steve Elster, told the justices in court papers.

[Responsibility2nd]

Good to know that our Supreme Court is on top of vital issues concerning America.

[ClearCase_guy]

Does this shirt rise to the level of a Mean Tweet?

[OrioleFan]

How about the Supreme Court rules on all these bogus trials of President Trump. What have they become ... Congress? Don’t answer that.

[Sooth2222]

Better than big on wars, big on taxes...

[calljack]

How about Biden too stupid. Any problem with that?

[Sooth2222]

Trump is not a party to the case, but his name will likely be tossed around constantly during oral arguments as the justices weigh whether a federal trademark statute that prevented the activist from registering “Trump Too Small” as a slogan for t-shirts without the former president’s explicit permission runs afoul of the First Amendment.

I hope that the activist prints up warehouses full of the shirts. (Somehow, I doubt that they will be big sellers.)

[Scrambler Bob]

How about Biden too stupid. Any problem with that?
= = =

The back of the shirt is too small to list all Biden’s ‘too stupid’s’

[AndyTheBear]

Its a stupid and vulgar meme, but seems pretty clear its political speech and protected under the first amendment.

[gundog]

It does open a can of worms, doesn’t it? Kamala sucks!

[digger48]

Democrats can’t meme

Nobody gets it when they try

[HYPOCRACY]

The Roberts court is a clown show of cowards.

[gibsonguy]

This crap they take up.
Stolen elections. nope
Rat hack judges harassing an ex President and his family. nope.

[CommerceComet]

Democrats can’t meme

Creating a good meme requires a sense of humor which progressives just don't possess. Any meme that they attempt will be humorless and/or mean spirited.

[odawg]

That is, essentially, a homosexual mindset, since normal males, and I use the “normal” on purpose, don’t concern themselves with what other men have or don’t have.

[No name given]

Exactly. All demonrats are is spoiled brats demanding everything for free handed to them on a silver platter!

[Migraine]

“Lefties So Retarded”

Now there’s a T-Shirt.

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

This is a yuge important issue that will answer...
Can I trademark Pedo Biden T-shirts?

[right way right]

Pathetic small brained commies.

[Alberta's Child]

Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I've always been under the impression that you can't trademark someone else's name.

I'm pretty sure General Motors, for example, could not trademark the Ford name even if Ford Motor Co. had no trademark protection.

[SunStar]

This is a waste of time, it’s clearly free speech, and doesn’t even infringe on campaign or corporates logos. How is it even possible that this case could be a real thing?