Florida Bar v. Went for It, Inc.

Background

The Florida Bar adopted rules banning lawyers and lawyer referral services from sending targeted written solicitations to personal injury or wrongful death victims or their relatives for 30 days after an accident or disaster. A lawyer-run referral service (Went For It, Inc.) challenged the rules as violating the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Lower courts ruled for the challengers, but the Supreme Court reviewed the case and addressed the constitutionality of the 30‑day blackout.

Reasoning

The Court framed the question as whether the rules are a permissible restriction on commercial speech. Applying the Central Hudson test, the majority found a substantial state interest in protecting the privacy and tranquility of recent accident victims and in preserving the profession’s reputation. The Bar submitted a two‑year study with statistical and anecdotal evidence (including that lawyers mailed many targeted solicitations and surveys showing negative public reactions). The Court concluded the ban directly and materially advances the interest and is narrowly tailored in scope and duration, while allowing many alternative advertising channels.

Real world impact

The decision permits Florida to enforce the 30‑day restriction on targeted direct mail and limits lawyers and referral services from singling out recent accident victims. Personal injury lawyers must rely on other advertising methods during the blackout. The ruling rests on the record and the specific circumstances the Court reviewed, so its scope is tied to the evidence presented.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Kennedy’s dissent argued the ban suppresses protected lawyer speech, criticized the Bar’s evidence as thin, warned that the rule may block timely legal help, and viewed the restriction as overbroad.