Central Hudson test
A 4-part analysis by the US Supreme Court after Central Hudson*, which it used to determine if the Constitution would allow a ban on advertising of tobacco products
*447 US 556–1980, Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp v. Public Service Commission of New York
1. Does tobacco advertising merit any protection under the first amendment?
To constitute protected commercial speech, tobacco advertising must be lawful and not misleading.
2. Is there a substantial governmental interest in regulating the issue?
The government does have a substantial interest in reducing the incidence of disease and death that result from tobacco use in this country
3. It must be reasonable to believe that the advertisement of tobacco products tends to increase demand for them.
It could not be seriously argued that the tobacco industry spends over $3 billion dollars annually on advertising that does not serve to increase the demand for its products.
4. The regulation must not be more extensive than necessary to serve the governmental interest.
The test does not require that the government use the least restrictive means of control, but rather the one that it deems to be most effective.
Reference JAMA 1990; 264:1593