A federal district judge ruled against the actors union and a California law banning the publication of actors’ ages by entertainment employee services if the actors object. The judge said the law violated the First Amendment and would allow states to “forbid publication of virtually any fact.” The Screen Actors Guild (SAG) backed passage of the law to combat age discrimination in the entertainment business. (Los Angeles Times, February 20, 2018, by David Ng)
The judge, Vice Chhabria, was unimpressed with the argument that commercial speech was entitled to fewer constitutional protections than non-commercial speech. Chhabria wrote that the restricted information was conveyed “in a manner unconnected to any commercial transaction.” Citing Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. he added that a third party’s potential unfair use of information “almost never” justified the lock down of truthful speech. (Forbes, February 22, 2018, by Cory L. Andrews of the Washington Legal Foundation)
Chhabria took a dim view of the California law deeming it “a direct restriction on speech” to keep a third party from using information to engage in illegal discrimination. He urged SAG to address the underlying problem that the industry puts too much on female appearances and continues to “objectify and devalue women.” He did not feel that a law against posting ages would get at that problem. (techdirt, February 23, 2018, by Tim Cushing)
For previous FAC coverage of this issue click here.