Response:
Alex Kozinski & Stuart Banner, The Anti-History and Pre-History of Commercial Speech, 71 TEXAS L. REV. 747 (1993).
 

Abstract:
In this reply to Professors Collins and Skover’s article appearing in this same issue of the Texas Law Review, Professors Kozinski and Banner acknowledge the importance of the issues that Collins and Skover raise regarding the failure of current commercial speech to serve the ideals that freedom of speech seeks to uphold, namely rational decision-making and individuality, but criticize their romanticized notion of the past. This reply analyzes the current state of commercial speech and its constitutional implications. It agrees with Collins and Skover to the extent that the fact that most commercial speech does not appear to serve these free speech ideals is worthy of comment, but ultimately concludes that the current state of commercial speech is not that different than it was during the time that the Constitution’s framers lived. Thus, argue Kozinski and Banner, analyses of the distinction between commercial and non-commercial speech must incorporate a fair understanding of historical context.