---

544 U.S. ____ (2005)

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

---

Nos. 03—1164 and 03—1165

ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

[May 23, 2005]

Justice Ginsburg, concurring in the judgment.

I resist ranking the promotional messages funded under the Beef Promotion and Research Act of 1985, 7 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq., but not attributed to the Government,
as government speech, given the message the Govern-
ment conveys in its own name. See, e.g., U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services and U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2005, pp. 69, 30, available at http://www.healthierus.gov/dietaryguidelines/
dga2005/docume nt (as visited May 18, 2005, and available in Clerk of Court’s case file) (noting that “[t]rans fatty acids … are present in foods that come from ruminant animals (e.g., cattle and sheep)” and recommending that Americans “[l]imit intake of fats and oils high in saturated and/or trans fatty acids”); post, at 9, n. 7 (Souter, J., dissenting). I remain persuaded, however, that the assessments in these cases, as in United States v. United Foods, Inc., 533 U.S. 405 (2001), and Glickman v. Wileman Brothers & Elliott, Inc., 521 U.S. 457 (1997), qualify as permissible economic regulation. See United Foods, 533 U.S., at 425 (Breyer, J., dissenting). For that reason, I concur in the judgment.