Fred H. Edenfield v. Scott Fane
507 U.S. 761 · Decided April 26, 1993 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Fred H. Edenfield v. Scott Fane was decided on April 26, 1993 by a vote of 8–1. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy 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 state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 507 U.S. 761 · 113 S. Ct. 1792 · 123 L. Ed. 2d 543 · 1993 U.S. LEXIS 2985
- Docket number
- 91-1594
- Decided
- April 26, 1993
- Argued
- December 7, 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
- 8–1
- Majority opinion
- Anthony M. Kennedy
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- 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 state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice David H. Souter | Majority | |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Majority |
Full case caption
Fred H. Edenfield, et al. v. Scott Fane
SCDB identifiers: case 1992-062, docket 1992-062-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Commercial speech, excluding attorneys”
- City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc.Law 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)
- City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc.Law 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