The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. Lamar Advertising of Louisiana, LLC: Difference between revisions

From The Satanic Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Lawsuits
  | title={{PAGENAME}}
  | image=
  | caption=
  | filedate=
  | jurisdiction=
  | plaintiff=The Satanic Temple Inc.
  | defendant=
  | intervenor=N/A
  | state=
  | case=
  | result=
  | appeal1=N/A
  | appeal2=N/A
  | appeal3=N/A
  | finalresult=
}}
The Satanic Temple Inc sued Lamar Advertising of Louisiana, LLC, in September 2020 over Lamar refusing to run some of TST's designs for a billboard campaign.  
The Satanic Temple Inc sued Lamar Advertising of Louisiana, LLC, in September 2020 over Lamar refusing to run some of TST's designs for a billboard campaign.  



Revision as of 04:56, 3 December 2021


The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. Lamar Advertising of Louisiana, LLC
Filing Date
Original Jurisdiction
Plaintiff The Satanic Temple Inc.
Defendant
Intervenor N/A
State
Case#
Original Result
First Appeal N/A
Second Appeal N/A
Final Result

The Satanic Temple Inc sued Lamar Advertising of Louisiana, LLC, in September 2020 over Lamar refusing to run some of TST's designs for a billboard campaign.

In TST's complaint, they claimed Lamar was discriminating against TST because Lamar had run other ads that were political or offensive in nature. In their reply, Lamar said they had run TST ads in the past, but TST's claim in this campaign was that people could use TST membership to circumvent state abortion laws under the reasoning that abortion was a "Satanic ritual"; Lamar argued this was not something TST could point to having demonstrated in any court in the states they were looking to run ads in (Indiana and Arkansas), and moreover, Lamar had the right to decline or withdraw an ad for any reason, regardless.

Ultimately, The Satanic Temple found a different billboard company, Clear Channel Outdoor, to run one version of their ads in several markets in Texas and Florida. In February 2021, The Satanic Temple withdrew the lawsuit on terms not made public.

References