Thomas, J., concurring

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 00—276

UNITED STATES and DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, PETITIONERS v.
UNITED FOODS, INC.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

[June 25, 2001]

Justice Thomas, concurring.

I agree with the Court that Glickman v. Wileman Brothers & Elliott, Inc., 521 U.S. 457 (1997), is not controlling. I write separately, however, to reiterate my views that “paying money for the purposes of advertising involves speech,” and that “compelling speech raises a First Amendment issue just as much as restricting speech.” Id., at 504 (Thomas, J., dissenting). Any regulation that compels the funding of advertising must be subjected to the most stringent First Amendment scrutiny.