Interior Design Litigation
Besides unconstitutionally censoring truthful commercial speech, “titling laws” serve as precursors to full-blown occupational licensure, which is the ultimate goal of a small faction within the interior design industry led by the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID).
Four states license the use of the term “interior designer” without regulating the work itself. The anti-competitive intent behind such regulations is clear: anyone who goes looking for an “interior designer” on the Internet or in the Yellow Pages in those states will find only government-licensed cartel members, while overlooking scores of capable designers.
Americans’ right to freely express themselves certainly includes the right to provide truthful information to potential customers and clients. That right, enshrined in the First Amendment, cannot simply be brushed aside by states seeking to promote the anti-competitive interests of the interior design cartel. Simply put, IJ’s lawsuit will demonstrate that the First Amendment is more than mere window dressing when it comes to interior designers.
Media Resources
Get in touch with the media contact and take a look at the image resources for the case.
Related Cases

Economic Liberty | Hair Braiding | Occupational Licensing
Three Idaho Women Challenge State’s Requirement for Hair Braiders to Obtain Cosmetology License

Economic Liberty | Private Property
Home day care provider sues city after officials shut her down over complaints from golfers
Bianca King is a single mother with two young children. Until recently, she was able to raise her 2-and 4-year-old kids while making a living running a small day care out of her home. But…

Economic Liberty | Private Property
Mechanic challenges city of Pasadena's mandatory parking minimum
Azael Sepulveda recently purchased a new mechanic shop, but the city of Pasadena will not let him open until he provides 28 parking spaces, which he does not need. Azael has partnered with IJ to…