On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that a law denying federal trademark protection to names deemed disparaging is unconstitutional.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the unanimous decision, quote,

it offends a bedrock First Amendment principle.

Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend.

The suit was brought by Portland dance rock band The Slants, Asian-American musicians,

who've taken their name from an ethnic slur and worn it with pride.

They sued because when they tried to register the trademark, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office said,

the slants?

No, no, no, no, no.

I spoke to the founder of the slants, Simon Tam, exactly two years ago, when the band had lost an appeal at the Federal Circuit Court.

I asked him why they chose that name in the first place.

Honestly, it came from a conversation that I had with a good friend of mine when I first had

the idea for starting an all-Asian ban. So I said, you know, what's something that you think

all Asians have in common? And without skipping a beat, they said, slanted eyes. So I thought

that's really interesting, because not only does it sound like some kind of cool

new wave band that Debbie Harry would be in, but it could also kind of be our slant on life,

our perspective as Asian Americans, and at the same time pay homage to decades of work by

Asian American activists who've been kind of reclaiming slant in a positive,

appropriated manner. I'm curious why you need to have the slants be a registered trademark.

What's the business purpose behind that? In addition to the normal benefits like being able to

protect your brand and merchandise, in the music industry, it's extremely important because there are licensing agencies

and their record labels who actually refuse to do business with acts who do not have a registered

...