City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc.
507 U.S. 410 · Decided March 24, 1993 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc. was decided on March 24, 1993 by a vote of 6–3. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Commercial speech, excluding attorneys” in the First Amendment area. SCDB records that the Court declared a municipal or other local ordinance unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 507 U.S. 410 · 113 S. Ct. 1505 · 123 L. Ed. 2d 99 · 1993 U.S. LEXIS 2401
- Docket number
- 91-1200
- Decided
- March 24, 1993
- Argued
- November 9, 1992
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority opinion
- John Paul Stevens
- Opinion assigned by
- John Paul Stevens
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Commercial speech, excluding attorneys
- Issue area
- First Amendment
- Legal provision
- First Amendment (speech, press, and assembly)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Held unconstitutional
- A municipal or other local ordinance
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Byron R. White | Dissent | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority | |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority | |
| Justice David H. Souter | Majority | |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Dissent |
Full case caption
City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc., et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1992-047, docket 1992-047-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Commercial speech, excluding attorneys”
- Fred H. Edenfield v. Scott FaneLaw held unconstitutional
- United States and Federal Communications Commission v. Edge Broadcasting Company T/a Power 94
- Robert E. Rubin v. Coors Brewing CompanyLaw held unconstitutional
- 44 Liquormart, Inc. and Peoples Super Liquor Stores, Inc. v. Rhode Island and Rhode Island Liquor Stores AssociationAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Board of Trustees of the State University of New York v. Fox
- Dan Glickman v. Wileman Brothers & Elliott, Inc.
Cases on the same legal provision: First Amendment (speech, press, and assembly)
- El Vocero de Puerto Rico v. Puerto RicoLaw held unconstitutional
- Lamb's Chapel and John Steigerwald v. Center Moriches Union Free School DistrictLaw held unconstitutional
- Wisconsin v. Todd Mitchell
- International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Walter Lee
- Walter Lee v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc.Law held unconstitutional
- Rav v. City of St. PaulLaw held unconstitutional
Same Term, same area (First Amendment)
- Fred H. Edenfield v. Scott FaneLaw held unconstitutional
- El Vocero de Puerto Rico v. Puerto RicoLaw held unconstitutional
- Lamb's Chapel and John Steigerwald v. Center Moriches Union Free School DistrictLaw held unconstitutional
- Wisconsin v. Todd Mitchell
- Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. and Ernesto Pichardo v. City of HialeahLaw held unconstitutional
- Larry Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error