Summary

Peel v. Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of Illinois…

To reverse is to leave petitioner free to circulate his letterhead, not because it is protected under the First Amendment indeed, it is not-but because five Justices refuse to enforce the Rule even as applied, leaving the State powerless to act unless it drafts a narrower rule that will survive scrutiny under the First Amendment.
Source: Wikisource

Peel v. Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of Illinois…

This being so, the inquiry is not whether the regulation at issue here is invalid on its face, but whether it was constitutionally applied to forbid circulation of the letterhead in its present form. It is plain enough that it was so applied, for five of us hold that the letterhead is at least potentially misleading and hence must carry an appropriate disclaimer to qualify for circulation.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature