The Court of Appeals erred in requiring the District Court to apply a least restrictive means test to Resolution 66-156; so long as the means are narrowly tailored to achieve the desired objective, it is for governmental decisionmakers to judge what manner of regulation may be employed.
Board of Trustees of State University of New York v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469 (1989), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court instructed a lower court to reevaluate the compatibility of a resolution of the State University of New York that prohibited private commercial enterprises from operating in SUNY facilities with the First Amendment.[1] The Court instructed the lower court to use the standard outlined in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission (1980)[2] and determine whether the restriction on speech advanced the state's interest and, if so, whether the state's method was the least restrictive means to that end.[1] This approach ensures a balanced consideration, safeguarding the fundamental right to free speech while addressing the state's concerns in the most efficient and non-restrictive manner possible.
^ abBoard of Trustees of State University of New York v. Fox, 492U.S.469 (1989). This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document. "Viewing the challenged application of the resolution as a restriction on commercial speech, and therefore applying the test articulated in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Comm'n of New York, 447 U.S. 557, the Court of Appeals concluded that it was unclear whether the resolution directly advanced the State's asserted interests and whether, if it did, it was the least restrictive means to that end. The court therefore reversed and remanded to the trial court."
This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document. "Viewing the challenged application of the resolution as a restriction on commercial speech, and therefore applying the test articulated in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Comm'n of New York, 447 U.S. 557, the Court of Appeals concluded that it was unclear whether the resolution directly advanced the State's asserted interests and whether, if it did, it was the least restrictive means to that end. The court therefore reversed and remanded to the trial court."
