l speech", the United States Supreme Court has also extended this right to commercial entities.
In Bigelow v. Virginia, 421 U.S. 809 (1976), an editor of Virginia newspaper was convicted in violation of Virginia statute. The statute made it a misdemeanor the sale or circulation of any publication to encourage or promote to obtain abortion. The Supreme Court held that, "Speech is not stripped of First Amendment protection merely because it appears in the form of a paid commercial advertisement, and the fact that the advertisement in question had commercial aspect or reflected the advertiser's commercial interest did not negate all First Amendment guarantees." Id., at 809. This was one of the earliest cases that the Court recognized "commercial speech."
In Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748 (1976), consumers of prescription drugs brought suit against the Virginia State Board of Pharmacy and its individual members, challenging the validity of a Virginia Statute declaring it unprofessional conduct for licensed pharmacist to advertise the price of prescription drugs. The Supreme Court held that, "Commercial speech, like other varieties is protectedà[and] some form of commercial speech regulation are surely permissibleà." Id., at 770. The Court also held that, "Untrue speech, commercial or otherwise, has never been protected for its own sake." Id., at 771. The United States Supreme Court has, in different opinions, held that, "commercial speech" is a recognized form of speech. In addition, in Virginia State Board of Pharmacy it has specifically made it clear that "commercial speech" is not protected if it is used to deceive, lie, or mislead the public.
II. Historical Development of the Case
On or about 1996-1997 human right activists and groups such as Oxfam International discovered that Nike Corporation--namely its subcontractors, (Nike) were engaged in labor and human...