2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 16 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc. Anchor | green | “the difficulty of drawing bright lines that will clearly cabin commercial speech in a distinct category.” | 9 |
| 2 | Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp. | green | “advertisers should not be permitted to immunize false or misleading product information from government regulation simply by including references to public issues.” | 7 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.